Primedia (Pty) Ltd t/a Primedia Instore v Radio Retail (Pty) Ltd and Others

The parties were competitors in the retail in-store advertising and media industry. The respondents had concluded exclusive agreements with approximately 330 Spar franchise stores to provide certain in-store media services. Primedia, the appellant, had pre-existing (non-exclusive) agreements with about 110 of those franchisees. After Primedia circulated a notice to Spar suppliers claiming to be the exclusive provider of in-store media services to the Spar Group and continued operating in some stores with which the respondents had exclusive agreements, the respondents alleged that Primedia unlawfully interfered with their contractual relationships. They sought interdictory relief to restrain Primedia from interfering with those contracts and from making false representations. Primedia contended that it was merely enforcing its pre-existing contractual rights and denied any unlawful competition.

The appeal was upheld. Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the High Court’s order were set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the main application with costs. The respondents were ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, except that Primedia was ordered to pay the costs relating to its abandoned counter-application.

The case clarifies the limits of unlawful competition in South African law and confirms that the enforcement of pre-existing contractual rights, without inducement of breach or other wrongful conduct, does not amount to unlawful competition. It reinforces the principle that interdictory relief requires proof of wrongful interference and a reasonable apprehension of future harm.