Publications
Partners
This was after the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein ruled against the manufacturers of the Tiffany Break on the grounds of intellectual property and trademark law.
The International Foodstuffs Co and Iffco South Africa had unsuccessfully appealed to the SCA for the lifting of an interdict prohibiting them from selling the Tiffany Break.
Their lawyer Lizl Combrinck said in court papers there was no confusion among the public over the two chocolate bars.
"The interpretation of the Trade Marks Act which is applicable in this case, is of utmost importance for the public. It is in the interest of South African enterprises and the public in general that intellectual property is protected properly and that legislation is interpreted correctly," Combrinck said, according to Netwerk24.
"In this case foreign investors also have an interest in the way our intellectual property rights are applied and interpreted, because it could affect their decisions to invest in the country."
The interdict had been granted in Nestlé's favour over the shape of the KitKat, registered as a trademark.
The SCA had ruled that the interpretation of the Law on Trademarks and application of intellectual property rights were of great importance to the public, businesses and foreign investors.
The SCA had found strong similarities between the two chocolates, which come down to losses to Nestle.
