South Africa Case Law

Fontana Di Purezza (Pty) Ltd ta Manzi Northcliff v Trustees for Time Being OG ZYZZYVA Trust (2024/120994)

Fontana Di Purezza (Pty) Ltd ta Manzi Northcliff v Trustees for Time Being OG ZYZZYVA Trust (2024/120994) [2025] ZAGPJHC 154 (6 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/120994

Judge

E Raubenheimer

The court found that the applicant failed to establish true urgency, as the delay of two months before launching the application rendered the matter inappropriate for urgent relief. The applicant's concerns regarding the safety of the equipment and premises, as well as the alleged risk to assets, did not constitute objective urgency. The applicant's urgency was self-created. Furthermore, the proprietary and partnership disputes between the parties were complex and unsuitable for resolution in urgent motion proceedings. The applicant did not demonstrate a clear right to the interdictory relief…

Source excerpt

• Urgent Interdict
• Franchise Dispute
• Trademark Infringement
• Ownership Of Assets
• Partnership Existence
• Security For Debt

Designer Water (Pty) Ltd v Alkamax Beverages (Pty) Ltd and Others (59246/21)

Designer Water (Pty) Ltd v Alkamax Beverages (Pty) Ltd and Others (59246/21) [2024] ZAGPPHC 878 (9 September 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

59246/21

Judge

M V Noko

The High Court dismissed Designer Water’s leave to appeal against refusal of an interim interdict over trademark, passing off, and confidentiality claims.

• Interim Interdict
• Trademark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Confidential Information
• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Award

Bata Brands SA v Rexview Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (55598/2020)

Bata Brands SA v Rexview Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (55598/2020) [2024] ZAGPPHC 721 (15 June 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

55598/2020

Judge

DM Leathern

The High Court dismissed an exception to amended particulars of claim in a trademark and copyright dispute, finding sufficient facts pleaded against the second defendant.

• Trademark Infringement
• Copyright Infringement
• Passing Off
• Aiding And Abetting
• Exception Procedure
• Trademark-infringement

Kawasaki Robotics GmbH and Another v Directech (43250/2020)

Kawasaki Robotics GmbH and Another v Directech (43250/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 991 (12 December 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

43250/2020

Judge

Ally

The High Court referred a trademark infringement dispute to oral evidence after finding material disputes of fact about post-termination use and authority.

• Trademark Infringement
• Registered User Vs Permitted User
• Interdict Requirements
• Dispute Of Fact
• Oral Evidence Referral
• Trademark-infringement

Cochrane Steel Products (Pty) Ltd v G Harrop-Allin and Sons (Pty) Ltd (6031/21;12358/21)

Cochrane Steel Products (Pty) Ltd v G Harrop-Allin and Sons (Pty) Ltd (6031/21;12358/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 408 (9 June 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

6031/21;12358/21

Judge

Kooverjie

The court found that Harrop's use of 'RAZOR MESH' was not bona fide descriptive use but rather trademark use, given the prominence and context in which the mark appeared on Harrop's promotional materials. The mark 'RAZOR MESH' was held to be distinctive and not a generic or purely descriptive term in the fencing industry. The applicant's trademark was capable of distinguishing its goods from those of others, both at the time of registration and at the time of the application. Harrop failed to demonstrate that the mark had become customary or lost its distinctiveness. Consequently, Harrop's us…

Source excerpt

• Trademark Infringement
• Bona Fide Descriptive Use
• Distinctiveness
• Expungement Of Trademark
• Likelihood Of Confusion

South African Medical Association NPC v South African Medical Association Trade Union and Others (2020/21526)

South African Medical Association NPC v South African Medical Association Trade Union and Others (2020/21526) [2020] ZAGPPHC 196 (19 May 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2020/21526

Judge

Mokose

The court found that the applicant established a clear right to its name and trademarks, and that the respondents infringed this right by representing themselves as the applicant and using its intellectual property without authority. The applicant had withdrawn any prior consent for such use, and the respondents' continued conduct created confusion among the public and the applicant's members. The Registrar of Labour Relations lacked jurisdiction over intellectual property disputes, and no alternative remedy was available to the applicant. The requirements for a final interdict were met, and…

Source excerpt

• Final Interdict
• Trademark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Urgent Relief
• Personality Rights

Steelite Towbar and Silencer Centre CC v Autofit Fitment Centre CC and Others (84301/2017)

Steelite Towbar and Silencer Centre CC v Autofit Fitment Centre CC and Others (84301/2017) [2020] ZAGPPHC 351 (23 March 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

84301/2017

Judge

Molefe

The court found that the respondents were in contempt of the order dated 11 January 2019. The evidence showed continued use of the prohibited name and logo 'Autofit Fitment Centre' on websites, social media, invoices, and business premises after the order was granted. The respondents' explanations, including reliance on counsel's advice and claims of inadvertence, were rejected as unreasonable and mala fide. The respondents failed to provide evidence establishing reasonable doubt as to whether their non-compliance was wilful or mala fide. The court held that the respondents' actions were deli…

Source excerpt

• Civil Contempt Of Court
• Trademark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Enforcement Of Court Orders

Red Diamond Holdings SARL v Eye of the Storm 2 (Pty) Ltd (13280/18)

Red Diamond Holdings SARL v Eye of the Storm 2 (Pty) Ltd (13280/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 490; [2020] 1 All SA 829 (GJ); 2020 BIP 392 (GJ) (28 November 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13280/18

Judge

Spilg

The court found trademark infringement for post-September 2017 Lee Cooper apparel, refused final interdictory relief, and ordered disclosure and accounting.

• Trade Marks Act
• Sub Licensing
• Reasonable Royalty
• Accounting For Profits
• Trademark Infringement
• Trademark-infringement

Owner of Papa Super Maize Meal (Pty) Ltd v Tau Rollemeule CC (26866/13)

Owner of Papa Super Maize Meal (Pty) Ltd v Tau Rollemeule CC (26866/13) [2015] ZAGPPHC 690; 2015 BIP 374 (GP) (8 October 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

26866/13

Judge

AC Basson

The High Court granted an interim interdict stopping continued use of the PAPA trademark, finding a prima facie right, likely infringement, and no satisfactory alternative remedy.

• Trademark Infringement
• Passing Off
• Interim Interdict
• Trade Marks Act
• Unlawful Competition
• Trademark-infringement

Boyd and Thorne Property Investments CC t/a Landlords v Landlords Residential Letting and Sales CC and Others (6947/2012)

Boyd and Thorne Property Investments CC t/a Landlords v Landlords Residential Letting and Sales CC and Others (6947/2012) [2013] ZAWCHC 38 (22 February 2013)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6947/2012

Judge

Ndita

The High Court granted a final interdict against former franchisees using “Landlords,” finding passing off, likely confusion, and a protectable goodwill.

• Passing Off
• Trademark Infringement
• Unlawful Competition
• Restraint Of Trade
• Passing-off
• Trademark-law