Rare trademark judgment in Zimbabwe

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Rare trademark judgment in Zimbabwe

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
jam-428094.jpg

IP judgments in Zimbabwe are unusual, says Chris Walters of Spoor & Fisher Jersey. So the recent Supreme Court decision in Cairns Foods v Netrade Marketing is welcome

Both companies in this case sell jam. Cairn Foods has a trademark registration in class 29 for a mark comprising the word Sun and a device of various fruits, whereas Netrade has a later registration in class 29 for the mark Royal Sun.

When Netrade used an unregistered logo featuring various fruits and the term Mixed Fruit Jam, Cairn Foods sued for trademark infringement and passing off. There was proof of actual confusion.

First instance decision

The first court held the marks were not confusingly similar. Inexplicably it said that Cairn Foods’ registration was simply a device (seemingly ignoring the word “Sun”). The plaintiff appealed.

Appeal court overrules

The appeal court looked to South African law for guidance and cited a number of cases that deal with issues such as the need to consider notional use, the notional consumer, and the general impression of marks.

Unsurprisingly the court overruled the earlier court’s decision that the plaintiff’s mark did not comprise the word “Sun”, describing it as “so grossly unreasonable in its defiance of logic as to attract interference on appeal”.

The approach should not be to conduct aforensic audit of the two marks... the law does not require the court to closely peer at the mark and the offending mark to find similarities and differences”.

The correct testis an assessment of the impact which the respondent’s mark would have on the average consumer … deception or confusion is a matter of first impression not an outcome of study”.

The result

There was both infringement and passing off. The court granted an injunction.

There is nothing ground-breaking here, but it is a welcome addition to African IP jurisprudence!

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

News of two pharma deals involving Novo Nordisk and GSK and a loss for Open AI were also among the top talking points
Howard Hogan, IP partner at Gibson Dunn, says AI deepfakes are driving lawyers to rethink how IP protects creativity and innovation
Vivien Chan joins us for our ‘Women in IP’ series to discuss gender bias in the legal profession and why the business model followed by law firms leaves little room for women leaders
Partner Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of IPNote, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, has taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Greg Munt, who has moved from Griffith Hack to James & Wells after four decades, hails his new firm’s approach to client service
Gift this article