honourable court on 24 November 1997 in case 14234/97 is dismissed.
2.
A rule nisi is issued calling upon the first, second and third respondents to show cause on 13 January 1999 why the
following orders should not be granted against them:
2.1
restraining the respondents from infringing the rights of the first applicant in its trade mark registration no.
79/3377
View Parallel Citation
PROMALIN in class 1 by using, in relation to the goods in respect of which it is registered, the mark PROMALIN,
in terms of section 34(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993;
3.
2.2
restraining the respondents from infringing the rights of the first applicant in its trade mark registration no.
1267/39/1 ABBOTT in class 1 by using, in relation to the goods in respect of which it is registered, the mark
ABBOTT, in terms of section 34(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993;
2.3
ordering the respondents to deliver up to the applicants' attorneys for destruction, all printed material in their
possession or under their control or in the possession or under the control of their employees, agents or
representatives, upon which the trade marks PROMALIN and ABBOTT appear without the authority of first
applicant;
2.4
restraining the respondents from comparing, in any way, the product PERLAN of the first respondent to the
product PROMALIN of the applicants by the use of the first applicant's registered trade mark 79/3377
PROMALIN;
2.5
ordering that prayers 2.1 to 2.4 operate as interim interdicts pending for finalisation of an action for, inter alia,
a final interdict and damages to be instituted within 30 (thirty) days of finalisation of this application;
2.6
ordering the respondents, jointly and severally, to pay ¾ (three quarters) of the applicants' costs of this
application, including the costs of the hearing on 30 September 1998 and including the costs occasioned by the
employment of two counsel;
2.7
granting the applicants such further and/or alternative relief as the honourable court may deem fit.
Pending the final determination of this application the provisions of paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 shall operate as
interim interdicts.
Page 517 of [1999] 1 All SA 502 (C)
4.
The application for a rule n i s i restraining the respondents from competing unlawfully with the applicants by
representing, in relation to their PERLAN products, the packaging thereof and all printed matter related thereto, that
the PERLAN trademark is registered in South Africa is dismissed.
For the applicants:
MM Jansen SC and PAL Gamble instructed by Cliff Dekker Fuller Moore Incorporated, Cape Town
For the respondents:
JW Louw SC and JN Cullabine instructed by Hofmeyr Herbstein Gihwala & Cluver Incorporated, Athlone