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
The danger of cutting and pasting provisions in your settlement agreements!
On 21 February 2021, the Labour Appeal Court in Wheelwright v CP de Leeuw Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd (2023) 44 [...]
Enhancing Innovation, Technologically
Continuing Werksmans' multi-disciplinary approach in providing our clients with innovative approaches that go beyond the law into wider, business [...]
The proper interpretation of conflicting provisions in the Income Tax Act
and Luke Magerman, Candidate Attorney A recent tax court judgment added valuable jurisprudence to the often-litigated issue of the interpretation [...]
What is the relevance of s 52 of the MPRDA on retrenchments in terms of section 189 and 189A in the mining industry?
In National Union of Mineworkers v Anglo American Platinum Ltd & others (Amplats), on 15 January 2013, Amplats had [...]
Mining terminology: the difference between “accepted”, “granted” “executed” and “registered”
Four of the most common words that one hears in conjunction with mining rights, prospecting rights are "accepted", "granted", [...]
Worried about the new EE Amendments? Progressive implementation of numerical targets is possible!
On 12 April 2023 the President signed the Employment Equity (EE) Amendment Bill, 2020 into law. The Act is [...]

