Mondi SA wins name dispute
Mondi SA has won a company name dispute after the Companies Tribunal ordered a company called Mondi Workplace Services to change its name, finding it is confusingly similar to Mondi SA’s name and trademarks, reports Business Day.
Mondi SA is a subsidiary of Mondi Plc, the international packaging and paper company whose shares are listed on the London and Johannesburg stock exchanges.
On the JSE it has a market cap of about R68bn. Its shares ended yesterday down 1.31% at R153.61.
Mondi owns forestry, pulp, paper and packaging businesses in SA, along with numerous registered trademarks, which is why it brought the company name objection.
In its decision, the tribunal ruled in favour of Mondi SA and directed Mondi Workplace Services to adopt a new name that ‘does not incorporate Mondi and is not confusingly and/or deceptively similar to the applicant’s’.
The dispute was brought in terms of section 11 of the Companies Act.
Mondi Workplace Services was registered in 2023, with Mondi SA arguing the name fell foul of the Act because ‘Mondi’ was its dominant, most recognisable element – visually, phonetically and conceptually indistinguishable from its own trademark.
Anyone coming across the name, it said, would reasonably assume the business was part of the Mondi group.
That, Mondi SA argued, exposed it to reputational risk it had not signed up for, and it asked the tribunal to force a name change. It also asked for a fallback, asking that if Mondi Workplace Services did not comply, the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) should step in and rename it using its registration number followed by ‘(Pty) Ltd’.
According to the papers, Mondi Workplace Services did not contest the application.
The tribunal found the name could give members of the public the impression that Mondi Workplace Services is associated with Mondi SA.
The tribunal ruled that Mondi Workplace Services has 60 days from receiving the ruling to file the amendment to its memorandum of incorporation.
If it misses that window – specifically, three months from the date of the order – the CIPC would have to step in and rename it using a placeholder.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.





