New twist to RG cigarettes war

HARRE - For the umpteenth time, Simon Rudland has lost his bid to continue marketing his Rudland & George (R&G) cigarette brand in Zimbabwe after the Constitutional Court threw out his appeal for the continued promotion of the product this week.

This also comes as the controversial businessman — along with Livera Trading (Livera) — had lost two High Court copyright infringement cases involving Tonbridge Assets Limited (Tonbridge) and Remington Gold’s previous owner Cut Rag Processors, prompting the beleaguered entrepreneur

to approach the highest court in the land.
However, Justice Vernanda Ziyambi on Monday barred Rudland from appealing to the Constitutional Court on the grounds that there were still other options available for redress.

“Decisions of this court have indicated that where there are other remedies available, an applicant must pursue those remedies before approaching the Constitutional Court.
“If the applicants’ grievances may be remedied by proceedings in another court, that is the route that the applicants must take,” he said in his ruling.

This was after Rudland’s lawyers, Atherstone and Cook, had argued that judge Justice Hlekani Mwayera’s previous ruling was constitutionally invalid as the applicants stood to suffer closure of their business and lose millions of dollars in the process.
Atherstone and Cook — instructed by advocate Thabani Mpofu and Nelson Chamisa — further argued Mwayera’s order was in breach of provisions 56 (1), 69 (2), 69 (3) and 69 (4) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. 

Mwayera upheld an earlier interim order by High Court judge Justice November Mtshiya that barred Rudland and Livera from packaging and selling cigarettes bearing the brand name “RG” on the Zimbabwean market.
Cigarettes bearing the name “RG” had flooded the market thereby prejudicing the owners of the renowned “Remington Gold” brand that is also shortened as “RG” on the tobacco market.

Savanna Tobacco is the licensed manufacturer and distributor of Remington Gold cigarettes in Zimbabwe.
In opposing Rudland’s appeal, Tonbridge’s lawyers, Kantor and Immerman, said the businessman should have exhausted all domestic remedies, including appealing to the Supreme Court.

“The application was defective in that no affidavit by the applicants’ legal practitioners was attached in support of the averments made by the applicant,” Kantor and Immerman said in their submissions. 

Comments (1)

Bt why would you name a ciggarette using controversial initials,for us RG is our President,and there is a clothing line too named after him,now you came with a ciggarette, and you think you can win a case ..enda unofa

Eyewitness - 27 October 2016

Post a comment

Readers are kindly requested to refrain from using abusive, vulgar, racist, tribalistic, sexist, discriminatory and hurtful language when posting their comments on the Daily News website.
Those who transgress this civilised etiquette will be barred from contributing to our online discussions.
- Editor

Your email address will not be shared.