Société des Produits Nestlé SA v International Foodstuffs Co 2013 JDR 2699 (GNP)

Société des Produits Nestlé SA v International Foodstuffs Co 2013 JDR 2699 (GNP)

Facts

Société des Produits Nestlé SA (Nestlé) is the owner of the registered trademark "MAGGI" for a variety of food products, including noodles. International Foodstuffs Co (IFC) is a South African company that sells a variety of food products, including noodles. IFC sold noodles under the trademark "MAGGI PLUS".

Nestlé sued IFC for trade mark infringement. Nestlé claimed that IFC's use of the trademark "MAGGI PLUS" infringed its registered trademark "MAGGI".

Issues

The main issue in the case was whether IFC's use of the trademark "MAGGI PLUS" infringed Nestlé's registered trademark "MAGGI".

Reasons

The Gauteng North High Court (GNP) held that IFC's use of the trademark "MAGGI PLUS" infringed Nestlé's registered trademark "MAGGI". The court reasoned that the two trademarks were similar enough to be likely to cause confusion among consumers.

Similarity of the trademarks

The GNP explained that the test for trade mark infringement is whether the two trademarks are similar enough to be likely to cause confusion among consumers. The court found that the trademarks "MAGGI" and "MAGGI PLUS" were similar enough to be likely to cause confusion among consumers because they were both pronounceable in the same way and they both began with the word "MAGGI".

Likelihood of confusion

The GNP also explained that the court must consider a number of factors in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion among consumers. These factors include:

• The degree of similarity between the two trademarks;
• The nature of the goods or services in relation to which the trademarks are used; and
• The knowledge of the average consumer.

The GNP found that there was a likelihood of confusion among consumers in this case because the two trademarks were similar and the goods in relation to which the trademarks were used were the same (noodles). The court also found that the average consumer would be likely to be confused by the two trademarks because they were both pronounceable in the same way and they both began with the word "MAGGI".

Conclusion

The GNP granted Nestlé an interdict interdicting and restraining IFC from using the trademark "MAGGI PLUS". The court also ordered IFC to pay Nestlé's costs.

500-Word Summary

The case of Société des Produits Nestlé SA v International Foodstuffs Co 2013 JDR 2699 (GNP) is an important case in South African trade mark law. The case is particularly important for its analysis of the following issues:

• The test for trade mark infringement; and
• The factors that the court will consider in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion among consumers.

The GNP's decision that IFC's use of the trademark "MAGGI PLUS" infringed Nestlé's registered trademark "MAGGI" is significant. The decision means that businesses cannot use trademarks that are similar to the well-known trademarks of other businesses without their permission.

The GNP's decision to consider the knowledge of the average consumer in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion among consumers is also significant. The decision means that businesses need to be aware of the knowledge of the average consumer when choosing trademarks for their products.