This is an objection to the respondent’s name LEGO AFRICA LOGISTICS under s 160 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) – based on s 11(2)(a)(iii) and s 11(2)(b)(iii) (albeit inadvertently cited as s 11(2)(b)(i)) of the Act) that the name is the same as and/or is confusingly similar to the applicant’s trade mark LEGO – held: the trade mark is not the same as the respondent’s name as the inclusion of the words “AFRICA LOGISTICS” in the name denotes the difference between the two – held: application granted under the provisions of s 11(2)(b)(iii) of the Act – held: due to the absence of notice to and non-joinder of the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (the CIPC) an order is impossible directing the CIPC to replace the respondent’s name with its registration number should the respondent default in compliance.