In terms of the Counterfeit Goods Act 37 of 1997 ("the Act") the appellant ("BP") caused to be issued three search and seizure warrants by a magistrate in Johannesburg, authorising a search for and the seizure of alleged counterfeit goods at the business premises of the first respondent ("Ellies").
The plaintiff was the executor in a deceased estate. In 1950, the deceased had entered into a notarial agreement in terms of which he waived all his rights to a deed of fideicommissum made by his father, as well as all his rights under the will of his grandparents, on condition that, whether or not he died before his parents, a farm bequeathed by his grandparents would devolve upon his heirs or executors, and be transferred to them.
The coronavirus pandemic wreaked havoc on the market for mergers and acquisitions in the middle of last year, causing a shortterm stoppage in deal activity, leading multiple major transactions to be revised or abandoned, and resulting in some parties taking their disputes to court. Here, Law360 looks at seven of the most significant deals that broke down because of the effects of COVID19.
Intellectual property firms ranging from just a handful of lawyers to several hundred attorneys said the COVID19 pandemic was a logistical curveball, but their industry has largely been insulated from the worst of the pandemic's financial woes.
In the case of Swatch AG (Swatch SA) v Apple Inc, in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), Swatch AG, the owner of the 'Swatch' trade mark had opposed the registration of the 'iWatch' trade mark filed by Apple Inc.
The respondent ("Beiersdorf") marketed personal care products comprising shower gels, face products and body lotions throughout the world, including South Africa. It was the manufacturer and distributor of NIVEA MEN personal care products, and was the proprietor, since 1911, of the NIVEA trademark, a personal care brand focused on body care. Since 1925, Beiersdorf had consistently used a blue and white colour combination in the getup of its NIVEA products. More specifically, it used the combination of a white font on a blue background. Given the extensive and longstanding use of the getup, Beiersdorf's packaging has become associated with it as have NIVEA personal care products.
The first respondent (Brien) was a director and shareholder of the applicant. After about five years with the company, he left the applicant's employ in 2020. His proffered reasons for exiting were the breakdown in his relationship with another director in the company, and the fact that he had not been paid his full salary for a while, resulting in his being owed R1.2m by the company. After his resignation, he took up employment with the second respondent ("Provantage"), a competitor of the applicant.
The applicant ("Open Horizon") was the registered proprietor of several trade marks (referred to hereinafter as the "Pacific trade marks") which were registered in respect of, inter alia, cigarettes. The respondent ("Carnilinx") was a South African company and a direct competitor of Open Horizon and was previously licenced in October 2015 by Open Horizon and its predecessorin title ("Savanna") for the manufacturing of PACIFIC BLUE cigarettes. The licence agreement was operative from November 2015 for a period of three years and in terms of same Carnilinx acknowledged Savanna's intellectual property in respect of the PACIFIC BLUE trade mark. Carnilinx agreed not to do anything that would in any way impair Open Horizon's rights.
The parties in this matter, “HTC” and “Apple”, embarked on litigation involving four patents owned by Apple. Following the judgment handed down in that action, Apple brought an appeal. The present judgment was concerned with only two of the patents (referred to in the judgment as the “948 patent” the “022 patent”).