Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Kenya: SONY is not well-known
By Janine Hollesen and Donvay Wegierski, Directors
In Sony Corporation vs Sony Holdings Limited the Kenyan High court dismissed the Japanese corporate’s trade mark opposition to trade mark applications filed for SONY in classes outside of those already registered by Sony Corporation, the court finding that it’s SONY mark is not well-known in Kenya. The burden of proof for well-known status therefore remains high, with the courts requiring substantial evidence taking into account a range of factors.
The general principle for Paris convention member countries is that a mark granted well-known status enjoys broader protection than an ordinary mark in that country. Section 15A of the Kenyan Trade Mark Act grants protection to well-known marks in terms of which it is necessary to provide evidence of sufficient knowledge of the mark within the relevant sector. A foreign reputation does not satisfy the criteria as it must be proved that this reputation extends to Kenya.
Even though the Sony Corporation relied on its extensive sport sponsorship and world-wide trade mark registrations for the mark SONY, the court didn’t regard this as proof of repute in Kenya, only accepting evidence of brand value in Kenya which alone did not elevate the SONY trade mark well-known.
If you would like to learn more about Intellectual Property please visit our practice area page.
Latest News
Will secondaries solve liquidity issues in South Africa’s private equity market?
by Dylan Cunard, Director A multi-billion dollar revolution in global private capital could arrive in South Africa. South Africa’s private [...]
Procedural certainty in business rescue: Competing commencement processes
by Eric Levenstein, Director and Head of Insolvency & Business Rescue, Brandon Starr, Senior Associate and Clio Patricios, Candidate Attorney [...]
When silence becomes complicity: Constructive dismissal, workplace bullying and the cost of doing nothing
by Bradley Workman-Davies, Director Constructive dismissal remains one of the more difficult claims to prove in South African labour law. [...]
Nxele v Chairperson of the Disciplinary Hearing: Mudau NO and others, [2026] 6 BLLR 628 (LC): Clarifying the operation of section 188A(11) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
by Bankey Sono, Director and Sandile Mogweng, Candidate Attorney The Labour Court in Nxele v Chairperson of the Disciplinary Hearing: [...]
No grout about it: The LAC cements section 197 principles
by Bradley Workman-Davies, Director Section 197 of the Labour Relations Act has long been one of the most misunderstood and [...]
Making sense of death: A brief overview of inquest proceedings
by Dakalo Singo, Director and Head of Pro Bono By its very nature, death is tragic. The death of a [...]

