Can the state take your trademark? Understanding South Africa’s Expropriation Act

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Can the state take your trademark? Understanding South Africa’s Expropriation Act

Sponsored by

spoor-fisher-400px.png
Johannesburg city centre with the South African flag on the sides of a building

Herman Blignaut of Spoor & Fisher South Africa addresses whether the act extends to intellectual property rights and reassures brand owners that constitutional protection remains intact

Property comes in many forms. It can be land and buildings, vehicles, furniture, or other physical things we use or own. But it also includes intangible assets, such as intellectual property (IP); for example, trademarks, patents, and copyrights. These are recognised as property and are protected under Section 25 of the South African Constitution, just like physical property.

The Expropriation Act, No. 13 of 2024, which came into effect on January 24 2025, has sparked concern and debate. While the government has given assurances about its purpose, some uncertainty remains about how it will be used.

President Cyril Ramaphosa has stated that the act is not a tool for confiscation but rather a legal framework to help achieve fair access to land in a way that aligns with the Constitution. Despite this, there is still scepticism in some quarters.

The law has also drawn international attention. Recently, some white South Africans were accepted into the US as refugees. According to reports, one of the reasons given was the belief that they are victims of race-based discrimination – including concerns about property being taken without compensation. This was understood by some as a reference to the Expropriation Act.

Given all the debate and questions around expropriation in South Africa, it is understandable that owners of IP might wonder: could my trademark or other IP rights be taken without compensation under this law?

Here are the key points to consider:

  • IP is excluded – the Expropriation Act does not apply to trademarks or other types of IP. The provisions dealing with compensation – including cases where compensation may be nil – apply only to land.

  • Limited circumstances for nil compensation – in Section 12(3), the act sets out specific cases where land may be expropriated without compensation. These include land that is unused, held purely for speculative reasons, or abandoned, or where the amount the state has invested in the land is more than its market value.

  • Constitutional protection remains in place – the Constitution still requires that any expropriation must be for a public purpose or in the public interest, and must be accompanied by just and equitable compensation. This applies to all types of property, including IP.

  • Courts will oversee the process – even in cases involving land, any expropriation must go through proper legal processes. Courts have the power to review and ensure that the law is followed and the Constitution is respected.

In short, the Expropriation Act does not allow the government to take IP without compensation. The law is focused on land and specific land-related situations. Owners of trademarks and other IP rights do not need to be concerned that these assets could be affected in the same way.

While land reform is a complex and ongoing issue, the protection of IP in South Africa remains strong and is backed by both the Constitution and the courts.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Qantm CEO speaks to Managing IP about the business's first deal since it was acquired by a private equity firm and explains why top-tier Malaysian firm Henry Goh & Co was the group's ‘plan A, B and C’
György Pintz, founder of Pintz & Partners, talks through the challenges of founding a firm and explains why lawyers and table tennis players have more in common than you might expect
Kate Nuehring Su, partner at Marshall, Gerstein & Borun, explores a successful PTAB appeal and why the Federal Circuit reached an opposite outcome on the same doctrine
From BTS to Squid Game and kimchi to memory chips, the Korean wave is reverberating around the world and IP work is also seeing a boom, say two Yoon & Yang partners
Managing IP will host a ceremony in Kuala Lumpur on November 5 to reveal the winners
Recent lateral moves raise a bigger question for full-service firms – can patent litigation remain a strategic priority when competing practices generate larger profits?
As counterfeiters grow increasingly sophisticated, Gibson Dunn is differentiating its trademark practice through a focus on payment tracing, judgment enforcement and asset recovery
Anita Polott, who is celebrating three decades at Morgan Lewis this year, reflects on career progression, stepping into unfamiliar territory, and leadership frameworks
Technical excellence remains essential, but many firms are discovering that packaging IP with complementary practice areas can unlock new clients and a stronger competitive position
As international interest in Southeast Asia grows, Sheng Rong Tng discusses how changing client demands and the firm’s multidisciplinary model are helping it compete for complex regional mandates
Gift this article