关于知识产权 知识产权培训 树立尊重知识产权的风尚 知识产权外联 部门知识产权 知识产权和热点议题 特定领域知识产权 专利和技术信息 商标信息 工业品外观设计信息 地理标志信息 植物品种信息(UPOV) 知识产权法律、条约和判决 知识产权资源 知识产权报告 专利保护 商标保护 工业品外观设计保护 地理标志保护 植物品种保护(UPOV) 知识产权争议解决 知识产权局业务解决方案 知识产权服务缴费 谈判与决策 发展合作 创新支持 公私伙伴关系 人工智能工具和服务 组织简介 与产权组织合作 问责制 专利 商标 工业品外观设计 地理标志 版权 商业秘密 WIPO学院 讲习班和研讨会 知识产权执法 WIPO ALERT 宣传 世界知识产权日 WIPO杂志 案例研究和成功故事 知识产权新闻 产权组织奖 企业 高校 土著人民 司法机构 遗传资源、传统知识和传统文化表现形式 经济学 金融 无形资产 性别平等 全球卫生 气候变化 竞争政策 可持续发展目标 前沿技术 移动应用 体育 旅游 PATENTSCOPE 专利分析 国际专利分类 ARDI - 研究促进创新 ASPI - 专业化专利信息 全球品牌数据库 马德里监视器 Article 6ter Express数据库 尼斯分类 维也纳分类 全球外观设计数据库 国际外观设计公报 Hague Express数据库 洛迦诺分类 Lisbon Express数据库 全球品牌数据库地理标志信息 PLUTO植物品种数据库 GENIE数据库 产权组织管理的条约 WIPO Lex - 知识产权法律、条约和判决 产权组织标准 知识产权统计 WIPO Pearl(术语) 产权组织出版物 国家知识产权概况 产权组织知识中心 产权组织技术趋势 全球创新指数 世界知识产权报告 PCT - 国际专利体系 ePCT 布达佩斯 - 国际微生物保藏体系 马德里 - 国际商标体系 eMadrid 第六条之三(徽章、旗帜、国徽) 海牙 - 国际外观设计体系 eHague 里斯本 - 国际地理标志体系 eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange 调解 仲裁 专家裁决 域名争议 检索和审查集中式接入(CASE) 数字查询服务(DAS) WIPO Pay 产权组织往来账户 产权组织各大会 常设委员会 会议日历 WIPO Webcast 产权组织正式文件 发展议程 技术援助 知识产权培训机构 COVID-19支持 国家知识产权战略 政策和立法咨询 合作枢纽 技术与创新支持中心(TISC) 技术转移 发明人援助计划(IAP) WIPO GREEN 产权组织的PAT-INFORMED 无障碍图书联合会 产权组织服务创作者 WIPO Translate 语音转文字 分类助手 成员国 观察员 总干事 部门活动 驻外办事处 职位空缺 采购 成果和预算 财务报告 监督
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
法律 条约 判决 按管辖区浏览

WIPO Lex

WIPOLEX014-j

返回

Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa [2022]: Advertising Regulatory Board NPC and Others v Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd (786/21) [2022] ZASCA 51

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2023 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 7: Simplified or Fast Track Procedures for Certain Intellectual Property Claims

 

Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa [2022]: Advertising Regulatory Board NPC and Others v Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd (786/21) [2022] ZASCA 51

 

Date of judgment: April 12, 2022

Issuing authority: Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa

Level of the issuing authority: Appellate instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Administrative)

Subject matter: IP Regulatory Body; Enforcement of IP and Related Laws; Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights); Trademarks

Plaintiff: First Appellant: ADVERTISING REGULATORY BOARD NPC; Second Appellant: COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (PTY) LTD; Third Appellant: COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY

Defendant: Respondent: BLISS BRANDS (PTY) LTD

Keywords: Adjudicative administrative tribunal, Ousting the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts, Establishing a parallel dispute resolution process, Rules of evidence, Overlap with elements of a cause of action that could be pursued in a court, Public powers sourced by an agreement, Private body exercising a public function, Self-regulatory body, Right to self-regulation

 

Basic facts: The Final Appeal Committee (FAC) of the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) held against Bliss Brands, which was not one of the ARB’s members, in terms of clauses 8 and 9 of its consensual Code of Advertising Practice.  The FAC held that Bliss Brands had breached the Code by exploiting the advertising goodwill and imitating the packaging architecture of Colgate’s Protex soap.  It ordered Bliss Brands to cease the distribution of its Securex soap packaging.  

 

The FAC judgment was taken on review to the High Court (a court of first instance).  The High Court mero motu questioned the constitutionality of the ARB’s powers.  The High Court held, inter alia, that the ARB had no jurisdiction over non-members, that it could not oust the court’s powers and that it could not hear legal issues that entail the same enquiries as those which courts are called upon to consider in cases dealing with passing off and contraventions of copyright and trademarks.

 

Held: The Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa held that the ARB is a legitimate parallel adjudicative administrative tribunal, established by agreement/self-regulation.  The fact that elements of a complaint before the ARB might overlap with elements of IP causes of action that could be pursued in a court of law, does not mean that the ARB ousts the court’s jurisdiction.  The ARB may consider and issue a ruling to its members (which is not binding on non-members) on any advertisement, regardless of by whom it is published, to determine, on behalf of its members, whether its members should accept any advertisement before it is published or should withdraw any advertisement if it has been published.  Bliss Brands was held to be bound by the ARB’s FAC judgment, due to the aforesaid principle and the fact that it had subjected itself to the ARB’s jurisdiction.

 

A narrow application for leave to appeal, on the Advertising Regulatory Board’s jurisdiction only, was dismissed (see Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v Advertising Regulatory Board NPC and Others (CCT 132/22) [2023] ZACC 19).

 

Relevant holdings in relation to simplified or fast track procedures for certain intellectual property claims: The Advertising Regulatory Board is a constitutionally unassailable parallel adjudicative tribunal which may deal with complaints based on elements which overlap with the elements of traditional causes of action pertaining to copyright, trademarks and passing off, heard by courts (it bears mention that advertisements axiomatically include packaging and the use of trademarks and copyright).  It follows that the ARB’s simplified and accelerated procedure may be followed by parties who wish to resolve IP disputes (excluding most aspects of patent law) and make use of the remedies/sanctions imposed by the ARB.

 

                                                                                      

Relevant legislation:

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Act 2000 (Act No. 13 of 2000)

 

Electronic Communications and Transactions Act (No. 25 of 2002)

 

Not legislation but consensual codes:

The ARB’s CODE OF ADVERTISING PRACTICE, which is based upon the International Code of Advertising Practice, prepared by the International Chamber of Commerce. Available at: https://www.arb.org.za/phone/codes.html

 

The ARB’s Procedural Guide, with emphasis on section 14 (the sanctions which may be imposed). Available at: https://www.arb.org.za/assets/procedural-guide-v2021.1rev.pdf