South Africa Case Law

Supercart South Africa (Pty) Limited v Vanesco (Pty) Limited (46975/2018; 2021/30331)

Supercart South Africa (Pty) Limited v Vanesco (Pty) Limited (46975/2018; 2021/30331) [2025] ZAGPJHC 324; [2025] 2 All SA 911 (GJ) (25 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

46975/2018; 2021/30331

Judge

Goedhart

The High Court ordered further and better discovery in related design disputes, dismissed a strike-out application, granted condonation, and imposed a confidentiality regime.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Confidentiality Regime
• Registered Design Infringement
• Unlawful Competition
• Reasonable Royalty
• Interlocutory Strike Out

Innovative Water Care LLC and Another v Fludira Waterlinx (Pty) Ltd (69172/2019)

Innovative Water Care LLC and Another v Fludira Waterlinx (Pty) Ltd (69172/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 530; 2019 BIP 252 (GP) (25 October 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

69172/2019

Judge

Millar

The court found that the applicants' registered design specifically claimed the transparency or translucency of the tubular portion of the pool floater as a definitive feature in both the definitive and explanatory statements. This functional feature was not commonplace in the market prior to the applicants' registration and introduction of their product. The respondent's Blu52 floater embodied this protected feature, and the differences in other physical aspects were not significant enough to avoid infringement. The court distinguished the present design from an 'omnibus type' design, holdin…

Source excerpt

• Registered Design Infringement
• Functional Design
• Scope Of Protection
• Definitive Statement Interpretation

Jack Maserow Manufacturers CC v AXZS Industries (Pty) Ltd t/a Don Elly Enterprises (2014/60485)

Jack Maserow Manufacturers CC v AXZS Industries (Pty) Ltd t/a Don Elly Enterprises (2014/60485) [2015] ZAGPPHC 647; 2015 BIP 450 (GP) (8 September 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2014/60485

Judge

E Bertelsmann

The High Court found that the respondent's Seville bedroom suite infringed the applicant's registered design and granted interdictory and damages-related relief.

• Registered Design Infringement
• Novelty Requirement
• Aesthetic Design
• Damages Enquiry
• Interdict
• Designs Act 1993

Vari-Deals 101 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Sunsmart Products (Pty) Ltd (503/06)

Vari-Deals 101 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Sunsmart Products (Pty) Ltd (503/06) [2007] ZASCA 123; 2008 (3) 447 (SCA); 2007 BIP 69 (SCA) (27 September 2007)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

503/06

Judges

Harms, Nugent, Ponnan, Combrinck, Hurt

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants’ teardrop flag products infringed Sunsmart’s patent and registered design and dismissed the appeal.

• Patent Infringement
• Registered Design Infringement
• Anticipation
• Purposive Construction
• Contributory Infringement
• Patent-infringement