Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

1. The first applicant in this matter is Discovery Ltd (Discovery). It is the sole shareholder of the second and third applicants, Discovery Life Ltd (Discovery Life), and Discovery Vitality (Pty) Ltd (Discovery Vitality), respectively. Discovery is the proprietor of two trade marks, viz. Discovery and Vitality. The trade marks are registered in relation to insurance services, among others. Discovery has permitted Discovery Life and Discovery Vitality to use the trade marks under section 38 of the Trade Marks Act (the Act).[1] Discovery Life is a company offering life insurance, sickness and dread disease cover, disability cover and income protection. Discovery Vitality’s primary business comprises the Vitality wellness and rewards programme (the Vitality programme), which it administers.

2. The business of the respondent, Liberty Group Ltd (Liberty), includes the sale of life insurance and related products such as sickness cover, dread disease cover, disability cover and income protection. It is common cause that Liberty is a direct competitor of Discovery Life in this regard. The applicants contend that it also competes with Discovery Vitality, but this is disputed.

3. Anyone who is a member of a medical scheme offered within the Discovery group may elect to become a member of the Vitality programme. This involves payment of a monthly membership fee. The programme encourages members to lead a healthy lifestyle. Vitality members earn Vitality points for taking steps in this regard. The more points a member earns, the higher her Vitality status becomes. New Vitality members start out with a Blue status and can progress through the ranks to Bronze, Silver, Gold and Diamond status.