The Companies Tribunal on 13 February 2026 issued a decision regarding a company name objection based on trade mark rights, in the matter of Assembled Investments (Pty) Ltd (the applicant), and Rosemary (Pty) Ltd (the first respondent), with the Registrar of Companies as the second respondent. 

The applicant is the proprietor of the trade mark ROSE‑MARY, registered in 2018, which predates incorporation, in 2025, of the first respondent’s company name. Once the applicant became aware of the first respondent, it wrote to the first respondent, calling for its company name to be amended. However, the first respondent did not respond, and as such, the applicant brought an application before the Tribunal, for the first respondent’s name to be removed under Section 11(2) of the Companies Act: 

Section 11(2)(a)(iii) of the Act states that a company name must not be the same as a registered trade mark […] unless the registered owner of that mark has consented in writing to the use of the mark as the name of the company. 

Section 11(2)(b) of the Act states that a company name must not be confusingly similar to a name, trade mark, mark, word or expression contemplated in paragraph unless in the case of a name similar to a trade mark or mark referred to in paragraph (a)(iii). 

Section 11(2)(c)(i) of the Act provides that a company name mut not falsely imply or suggest or be such as would reasonably mislead a person to believe incorrectly, that the company is part of, or associated with, any other person or entity. 

The Tribunal found that the hyphen in the trade mark was not significant and found that there is a likelihood that consumers would assume some form of commercial association between the parties. The Tribunal considered common law rights and passing‑off, and separately, held that the director of the respondent’s personal name was not a defence to the use of the company name, concluding that the director’s personal connection does not constitute a defence where it conflicts with trade mark rights. 

The Tribunal therefore decided that the respondent was in contravention of section 11(2) of the Companies Act and ordered the respondent to amend its company name within 30 days of the decision.  

This is a cautionary tale to ensure that the Companies Register, Trade Marks Register as well as any other common law rights are assessed before a company name, trading name, or trade mark is adopted.