Case Law > Intellectual Property
 In a judgment handed down on 29 November 2010 in the matter between the Minster of Trade and Industry v E L Enterprises (193/10) [2010], the Supreme Court of Appeal considered the correct procedure to be followed in applications to confirm the seizure without a warrant of suspected counterfeit goods. The procedure is prescribed by Section 5(4)(a) of the Counterfeit Goods Act No. 37 of 1997 (“the Act”). Since the commencement of the Act, the practice has been to bring a full-blown High Court application under the section on notice to the respondents. The court held that this is not the procedure contemplated by the section; though an applicant would not be non-suited by doing so provided that the application is at least issued within the prescribed time period. |
| 18/03/2011 | Posted in: Intellectual Property |
 Swartland Winery was established as a co-operative in what was then the Malmesbury Wine of Origin District in the Western Cape in 1948. This district, which became known as “Swartland” in 1975, today has its own wine route, spanning Malmesbury, Piketberg, Porterville, Riebeek Kasteel and Riebeek West. It boasts many reputable wineries including Riebeek Cellars, Kloovenburg, Allesverloren, Darling Cellars and Pulpit Rock, to name but a few. |
| 18/03/2011 | Posted in: Intellectual Property |
|
Practical Law Company (PLC) Cross-border Life Sciences Handbook 2010/11 Click here to read the article Practical_Law_Company_(PLC)_Cross-border_Life_Sciences_Handbook_2010-11.pdf |
| 18/03/2011 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Patents |
 The Transvaal Provincial Division has given judgment in African Sun Hotels (Pty) Ltd v The Registrar of Companies & another, Case No. 58013/2007, a case which has implications about formal notices sent to a company at its registered address. |
| 9/12/2008 | Posted in: Trade Marks and Intellectual Property |
 The website domain name mixit.co.za was recently the subject of a dispute and some confusion has arisen about the implications of the ruling. This article is intended to clear up misconceptions. |
| 20/11/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and IT Law |
 How often have you considered patenting in Africa when considering your Intellectual Property strategy and decided that it would not be worthwhile because it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce your rights there? Well, the recent success of Pfizer, in respect of Pfizer Inc v Cosmos Limited (Case No. 49 of 2006), is a strong indication that you may have been wrong and that you should give filing your patents in Africa serious thought. |
| 13/11/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Patents |
 US-based Hillcrest Laboratories has filed a complaint with the US International Trade Commission (ITC), alleging that Nintendo has infringed Hillcrest’s patents in the making of its Wii video game. Wii has been a great success since its launch in 2006. If it is found that the Wii video game was made with infringed technology, the ITC has the power to bar the game from the US. |
| 11/11/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Patents |
 In an application to the High Court to enforce an order of the Supreme Court of Appeal, it was successfully argued on behalf of the first, second and third respondents, who are our clients, that the proceedings to enforce the order should be stayed until the determination of a pending review application. The order of the Supreme Court of Appeal interdicts one of the respondents from infringing a registered design. The pending review application was instituted by another of the respondents. |
| 6/11/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Designs |
 The High Court of South Africa (Transvaal Provincial Division) has ruled in favour of Lacoste in a case involving alleged counterfeit goods and the use of a “REPTILE” device which was contended to infringe its well-known registered CROCODILE device. Judgment was handed down on 30 September 2008 in Lacoste S.A. (formerly La Chemise Lacoste) vs Long Chang Trading CC, TPD case number 29835/05. |
| 13/10/2008 | Posted in: Trade Marks and Intellectual Property |
 The Cape High Court granted an order on 19 September 2008 against the well-known South African clothing designer, Jenni Button, interdicting her from making use in any way of the trade name JENNI BUTTON for purposes of conducting business within the retail clothing trade in South Africa. She was also directed to pay the costs of the application. The High Court actually dealt with two applications heard simultaneously : • the first, by Jenni Button against Jenni Button (Pty) Limited (“the company”) and other entities, to transfer to her 30 % of the shares of the company; and • the second, a counter-application by the company to restrain Jenni Button from using the trade name JENNI BUTTON for purposes of conducting business within the retail trade including as part of the domain name jennibutton.com. |
| 26/09/2008 | Posted in: Trade Marks and Intellectual Property |
 The South African Police Service has, in co-operation with well-known brand owners represented by Adams & Adams attorneys in South Africa, successfully prosecuted Papa Diop and Wide Road Import & Export CC for respectively dealing in and importing counterfeit goods in contravention of the Counterfeit Goods Act. |
| 7/08/2008 | Posted in: Trade Marks and Intellectual Property |
 In an important decision handed down by the Cape High Court Disney Enterprises Inc., together with three other studios and their exclusive licensee, Nu Metro, were granted injunctive relief (and other relief) restraining Mr Video and twenty-two of its franchisees from infringing the copyright in various cinematograph films by importing and hiring out Zone 1 DVDs only intended for the North American market. The main question before the Court was whether the conduct of Mr Video and its franchisees constituted direct infringement in terms of Section 23(1) of the Copyright Act 98 of 1978 read with Section 8(1)(g) which provides that hiring out a film is the exclusive right of a copyright owner. |
| 23/06/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Copyright |
 A previous judgment by the Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) relating to the same patent and registered design, but having different parties and a different infringing article, was referred to in the present matter as the Flag & Flagpole case. It had a bearing on the judgment in the present case, in which the appellants appealed against the orders of the Court of the Commissioner of Patents and the High Court, which had sat as one Court of first instance. It had held that the respondent’s South African patent had been infringed by a flag construction, illustrated as follows: |
| 17/03/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Patents |
 The Supreme Court of Appeal today upheld an appeal against a judgment in the Court of the Commissioner of Patents in terms of which that court ordered a plaintiff who is resident in South Africa to provide security for the costs of three of the defendants. |
| 11/03/2008 | Posted in: Intellectual Property and Patents |
 In an order dated 28 January 2008, the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa has dismissed (with costs) an application by McDonalds International Property Co. Limited for leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Bench of the Transvaal Provincial Division of the High Court upholding an earlier decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks refusing cancellation of the McBiscuit trade mark registration on the basis of several registrations for Mc and Mac trade marks. |
| 29/01/2008 | Posted in: Trade Marks and Intellectual Property |
|
The firm practises directly in several Southern African countries and through long-established associates in others.
