Claws out as High Court rules on Tammy Taylor trade mark franchising dispute

Image supplied

Buffing out the facts

Hlathuka, the applicant, believed she’d purchased a lucrative Tammy Taylor nail salon franchise for R600,000. But instead of a plush salon with pretty profits, she was left clipped and confused when reports surfaced, alleging that the Viljoens had no legal right to use or license the Tammy Taylor trade mark in South Africa.

Hoping to claw back her investment, Hlathuka took the matter to court. Her argument? That, among other things, Tammy Taylor, Inc (Tammy Taylor US), is the rightful owner of the Tammy Taylor trade mark and that the Viljoens had no legal authority to use and/or license the Tammy Taylor trade mark in South Africa.

She conducted a search of the Trade Marks Register, confirming that Tammy Taylor US is the registered owner of the following trade marks in South Africa:

She noted that Justsmart Mobile (Pty) Ltd, a company solely directed by Melany Viljoen, had previously filed applications to register Tammy Taylor South Africa and Tammy Taylor Nails South Africa logos (shown below), only for those applications to later be assigned to Tammy Taylor US.

The Viljoens also filed trade mark applications to register the Tammy Taylor Global Franchising trade mark. However, a search of the Trade Mark Register revealed that the Registrar provisionally refused these applications, because they were confusingly similar to the existing registered trade marks owned by Tammy Taylor US.

In seeking relief, Hlathuka asked the court to, among other things, prohibit the Viljoens from continuing to use the Tammy Taylor trade mark and/or to sell or operate any further franchises under the trade mark without the authorisation of Tammy Taylor US.

IP Law

Rhode blocked: Beauty pop-up gets shut down amid questions over authenticity

Nishaat Slamdien  26 Mar 2025

The court’s order

Granting Hlathuka some very welcome relief, the court ordered, among other things, that:

• The respondents must repay the applicant with the amount she invested, being R600,000, with interest calculated from the date payment was demanded.
  
• The respondents must immediately “cease representing or holding out to the public that they have the legal authority and right to sell Tammy Taylor Nail Franchises in South Africa”.
  
• The respondents are restrained from “selling Tammy Taylor franchises in South Africa, alternatively any nail salon that incorporates or uses the Tammy Taylor name of trade marks”.
  
• The respondents must “remove all references to ‘Tammy Taylor’ from their marketing materials, websites, products, and social media within 30 days from the date of the order”.

IP Law

Protecting distinctive trade marks: Will Adidas have to change its stripes?

Aletia Oberholster  7 Jun 2024

A nail-biting turn on appeal

Unwilling to let the polish dry, the Viljoens’ have filed an appeal against the court order, putting the brakes on its immediate enforcement and keeping this trade mark tussle alive.

A polished lesson in trade mark law

This matter is a reminder that unauthorised use of a registered trade mark is far from a cosmetic issue – it’s a commercial risk with serious legal consequences. The court’s order underscores that respecting the trade mark rights of others is not just a legal obligation, it’s also a strategic business imperative.

While Hlathuka has been successful so far, this is also a reminder to prospective franchisees to conduct a due diligence on their franchisors and be certain they actually have the rights they are offering to license. The last thing you want when investing into a franchise is to get caught up in a legal drama.