Clipsal Australia (Pty) Ltd v Trust Electrical Wholesalers and Another

The appellants were the proprietor of, and exclusive South African licensee under, a registered aesthetic design (A96/0687) for electrical accessory plates with surrounds, registered under the Designs Act 195 of 1993. The respondents manufactured and sold competing single and double electrical socket plates (Lear G-2000 series). The appellants alleged that these products infringed their registered design. The respondents defended the claim on the basis that the design was invalid for lack of novelty and originality, and that their products did not embody the registered design. The High Court dismissed the infringement application, finding the design not new or original and, in any event, not infringed. Leave to appeal was granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The High Court order was set aside and replaced with an order interdicting the respondents from infringing the registered design, directing them to surrender all infringing articles, ordering an enquiry into damages or a reasonable royalty under section 35(3)(d) of the Designs Act, and ordering the respondents to pay the appellants’ costs.

The case is a leading authority on the interpretation and application of the Designs Act 195 of 1993, particularly on novelty, originality, and infringement of aesthetic designs. It clarifies that mosaicking of prior art is impermissible in assessing novelty, explains the distinct meaning of originality under the 1993 Act, and confirms that infringement depends on whether differences are substantial, not merely present. The judgment provides important guidance on the scope of protection afforded by registered designs in South African law.