A legally protectable trade secret is secret information which is applicable in trade or industry, in respect of which the owner has the will to keep it secret, which has economic value, and which is concrete enough to be embodied in a tangible form and to exist separately form its owner. A comparative study reveals that while trade secrets can be infringed in three ways - namely unauthorized acquisition, use and disclosure - contemporary legal systems differ in respect of both the ambit and juridical bases of protection against such infringing conduct. The legal protection of trade secrets is promoted by the recognition of a subjective right to the trade secret. This right is an intellectual property right independent of statutory intellectual property rights like patent rights and copyright, the common law intellectual property right to goodwill, and the personality right to privacy. In South African private law, trade secrets can be adequately protected by the application of general delictual and contractual principles. Delictual wrongfulness of trade secret misappropriation is constituted by an infringement of the right to the trade secret. Thus any act that interferes with the powers of use, enjoyment and disposal exercised by someone with a subjective right to that trade secret, is, in the absence of legal grounds justifying such interference, wrongful. Patrim·onial loss caused by both intentional and negligent infringement of trade secrets should be actionable under the actio legis Aquiliae. Wrongful trade secret infringements can - also in the absence of fault on the part of the infringer - be prevented by an interdict. Protection of trade secrets is not restricted to the contexts of either unlawful competition, or fiduciary relationships. Trade secret protection is on a sound footing in South African law, compares favourably with the position in other legal systems, and is in step with the international agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights to which South Africa is a signatory nation. / Private Law / LL.D. (Private Law)

A legally protectable trade secret is secret information which is applicable in trade or industry, in respect of which the owner has the will to keep it secret, which has economic value, and which is concrete enough to be embodied in a tangible form and to exist separately form its owner. A comparative study reveals that while trade secrets can be infringed in three ways - namely unauthorized acquisition, use and disclosure - contemporary legal systems differ in respect of both the ambit and juridical bases of protection against such infringing conduct. The legal protection of trade secrets is promoted by the recognition of a subjective right to the trade secret. This right is an intellectual property right independent of statutory intellectual property rights like patent rights and copyright, the common law intellectual property right to goodwill, and the personality right to privacy. In South African private law, trade secrets can be adequately protected by the application of general delictual and contractual principles. Delictual wrongfulness of trade secret misappropriation is constituted by an infringement of the right to the trade secret. Thus any act that interferes with the powers of use, enjoyment and disposal exercised by someone with a subjective right to that trade secret, is, in the absence of legal grounds justifying such interference, wrongful. Patrim·onial loss caused by both intentional and negligent infringement of trade secrets should be actionable under the actio legis Aquiliae. Wrongful trade secret infringements can - also in the absence of fault on the part of the infringer - be prevented by an interdict. Protection of trade secrets is not restricted to the contexts of either unlawful competition, or fiduciary relationships. Trade secret protection is on a sound footing in South African law, compares favourably with the position in other legal systems, and is in step with the international agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights to which South Africa is a signatory nation. / Private Law / LL.D. (Private Law)

This thesis investigates the role of prior use in common and statutory trade mark law. In the United States a pertinent requirement is priority of use. In the United Kingdom and South Africa, a reputation must be present. In the United Kingdom a plaintiff is required to have goodwill in the country, but in the United States and South Africa it is not required. The conception of a mark does not qualify for protection. It is not required that a business must have actually entered the market. In the United States the general approach is that a plaintiff will not receive protection in a remote area, but regard must be had to zones of natural expansion. British and South African law is the same, and protection may be obtained in areas where there is no trading. Where a dual reputation exists, neither party will be able to act against the other. The mere fact that the user of a mark was aware of the use thereof by another person, does not exclude protection. A trade mark application can be opposed on the basis of another application, combined with use of a mark, or on the ground of prior use. In some instances the fact that a mark has been filed will influence the burden of proof. In general, a registration can be expunged on the same grounds as would constitute grounds of opposition. The concurrent use of a mark can form the basis for the registration of a mark. In the United States, the use must have taken place prior to the filing date of the other party, but in the United Kingdom and South Africa, prior to the own filing date. In the latter two countries, knowledge of a mark is not necessarily exclusionary. Prior use is generally accepted as a defence to an infringement action. It is, however, noted that in various countries, it is only use prior to the relevant date that will be protected, and there is not necessarily a right to extend the scope of use concerned. / Mercantile Law / LL.D. (Mercantile Law)

This thesis investigates the role of prior use in common and statutory trade mark law. In the United States a pertinent requirement is priority of use. In the United Kingdom and South Africa, a reputation must be present. In the United Kingdom a plaintiff is required to have goodwill in the country, but in the United States and South Africa it is not required. The conception of a mark does not qualify for protection. It is not required that a business must have actually entered the market. In the United States the general approach is that a plaintiff will not receive protection in a remote area, but regard must be had to zones of natural expansion. British and South African law is the same, and protection may be obtained in areas where there is no trading. Where a dual reputation exists, neither party will be able to act against the other. The mere fact that the user of a mark was aware of the use thereof by another person, does not exclude protection. A trade mark application can be opposed on the basis of another application, combined with use of a mark, or on the ground of prior use. In some instances the fact that a mark has been filed will influence the burden of proof. In general, a registration can be expunged on the same grounds as would constitute grounds of opposition. The concurrent use of a mark can form the basis for the registration of a mark. In the United States, the use must have taken place prior to the filing date of the other party, but in the United Kingdom and South Africa, prior to the own filing date. In the latter two countries, knowledge of a mark is not necessarily exclusionary. Prior use is generally accepted as a defence to an infringement action. It is, however, noted that in various countries, it is only use prior to the relevant date that will be protected, and there is not necessarily a right to extend the scope of use concerned. / Mercantile Law / LL.D. (Mercantile Law)