Chicken Licken – South African trademarks
Updated 8 November 2026
Chicken Licken is a South African fried chicken fast-food chain. It is known for its SoulFood menu and memorable television advertising.
How Chicken Licken has built and protected its brands in South Africa – its trademark portfolio, where it expanded, how quickly its marks are registered, and who it competes with.
Download report (PDF)Chicken Licken trademarks in 45 seconds
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/chicken-licken-south-african-trademarks/overview-video.html
A portfolio built over time
Chicken Licken filed its first South African trademark in 1917 and has filed 706 since; its busiest year was 1990, with 74 new filings. The chart shows its filings per year from 1970.
Trademarks by filing year, up to 2024; applications still pending are not included.
The names behind the portfolio
Over the years the group has filed under several names – earlier company names, holding companies and subsidiaries. We count them together.
| Name | Marks | Filing years |
|---|---|---|
| Chicken Licken | 706 | 1917–2024 |
| Colden Fried Chicken | 3 | 1997–1997 |
Where Chicken Licken expanded its business
Trademark classes show what a business sells. Chicken Licken's portfolio is concentrated in meat, dairy & oils (class 29), coffee, flour & sweets (class 30), fresh produce & pet food (class 31). Its most recent moves were into ropes & tents (1997), yarns (1997), oils & fuels (1997).
Chicken Licken trademarks: expansion into trademark classes, 1970–2024
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/chicken-licken-south-african-trademarks/class-expansion-video.html
Each tile is a class; it lights up when the group first files in it and darkens with more filings; the dots show how many of its closest rivals also file in that class. The chart compares the number of classes used with its rivals. The video runs from 1970; classes entered earlier are lit from the start.
| Class | Marks | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| 29 Meat, dairy & oils | 211 | 29.9% | 1946 |
| 30 Coffee, flour & sweets | 197 | 27.9% | 1948 |
| 31 Fresh produce & pet food | 81 | 11.5% | 1948 |
| 42 Tech & IT services | 52 | 7.4% | 1981 |
| 43 Restaurants & hotels | 51 | 7.2% | 1984 |
| 35 Advertising & retail | 17 | 2.4% | 1990 |
| 32 Beer & soft drinks | 15 | 2.1% | 1982 |
| 33 Wines & spirits | 6 | 0.8% | 1971 |
The brands Chicken Licken protects most
The word marks and logo names Chicken Licken has filed most often – the same brand filed in more classes, in more versions or again over the years.
| # | Brand | Trademarks | Classes | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | S'GOOD, S'NICE | 42 | 42 | 1989–1997 |
| 2 | CHICKEN LICKEN | 26 | 22 | 1979–1990 |
| 3 | EXPRESS | 10 | 6 | 1948–1990 |
| 4 | SOUL | 10 | 6 | 1994–2001 |
| 5 | CHICKEN INN | 8 | 4 | 1990–2000 |
| 6 | FLY THRU | 6 | 6 | 2001–2001 |
| 7 | SOUL FOOD | 6 | 6 | 2001–2001 |
| 8 | KICKIN' CHICKEN | 5 | 5 | 2001–2001 |
| 9 | RED SQUARE | 5 | 5 | 1997–1997 |
| 10 | SEKUMOSHAKELE AH | 5 | 5 | 2000–2000 |
| 11 | SOUL'D OUT | 5 | 5 | 2002–2002 |
| 12 | SOUL DOCTOR | 5 | 5 | 2002–2002 |
| 13 | SOUL FUEL | 5 | 5 | 2020–2020 |
| 14 | TAXI EXPRESS | 5 | 5 | 1998–1998 |
| 15 | TOY BOX | 5 | 5 | 1999–2000 |
Logos filed most often (since 2020)
Chicken Licken's logos
The 0 different logos Chicken Licken has had published since 2020 – each logo shown once, however many classes or versions it was filed in. Logos protected in more classes come first.
How quickly its trademarks are registered
Over the last five years, Chicken Licken's marks took a median of 3.7 years from filing to registration, slower than the market's 2.7 years. Most of that time is examination: 3.2 years from filing to acceptance (market: 1.9). Registration itself follows about half a year after acceptance.
Median years from filing to registration per registration year, split into examination (filing → acceptance) and acceptance → registration; the dashed line is the market median. A high recent value means older applications came through that year.
Who files the most in Chicken Licken's classes
Ranked by number of trademarks filed in Chicken Licken's main classes – any company that files there, whatever else it does (including retailers' own brands). This shows Chicken Licken's market position, not who is most like it.
In the last five years, Chicken Licken was #43 of 919 filers in class 29 (meat, dairy & oils), with 6 of 2,013 trademarks; #104 of 1,368 filers in class 30 (coffee, flour & sweets), with 5 of 3,209 trademarks.
Chicken Licken's share of all trademarks filed in each of its main classes, per filing year.
Top trademark filers in class 29 (meat, dairy & oils), South Africa 1975–2024: Chicken Licken
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/chicken-licken-south-african-trademarks/class-29-race-video.html
Main competitors – the companies most like Chicken Licken
Ranked by how similar their whole trademark portfolio is to Chicken Licken's – the same mix of classes and the same words in their marks – not by size. Large filers in its classes that do something different rank lower here.
Chicken Licken's closest competitors in South Africa are Nando's.
Chicken Licken trademarks vs competitors: filings per year, 2010–2024
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/chicken-licken-south-african-trademarks/competitors-video.html
Trademark filings per year: Chicken Licken (orange) and its five closest competitors.
| # | Company | Relationship | Similarity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nando's | Direct competitor | 73% |
| 2 | PepsiCo | 96% | |
| 3 | Danone | 82% | |
| 4 | AVI | 79% | |
| 5 | RFG Foods | 77% | |
| 6 | Promasidor | 74% | |
| 7 | Pioneer Foods | 71% | |
| 8 | RCL Foods | 70% | |
| 9 | Clemengold International | 70% | |
| 10 | Bidfood | 70% |
Similarity of trademark activity since 2015 (classes and words used in marks). Retailers appear where their own brands compete on the shelf.
Chicken Licken – relevant export countries
Adjust the weightings
These weightings decide how the countries below are ranked. Change any value and the others adjust to keep the total at 100%.
Worldwide
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 5 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | European Union | 83 | US$536 m | +4% | National | US$2,388 |
| 2 | United Kingdom | 72 | US$196 m | +5% | National | US$1,371 |
| 3 | United States of America | 72 | US$150 m | +0% | National | US$3,425 |
| 4 | China | 70 | US$61 m | -10% | National | US$1,224 |
| 5 | Japan | 63 | US$36 m | -5% | National | US$1,774 |
| 6 | Switzerland | 58 | US$11 m | +2% | National | US$1,660 |
| 7 | Hong Kong SAR | 57 | US$18 m | -1% | National | US$1,715 |
| 8 | Mozambique | 56 | US$198 m | +6% | ARIPO | US$450 |
| 9 | Philippines | 56 | US$16 m | -1% | National | US$1,526 |
| 10 | Nigeria | 55 | US$14 m | -9% | National | US$1,015 |
Africa
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 5 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mozambique | 56 | US$198 m | +6% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 2 | Nigeria | 55 | US$14 m | -9% | National | US$1,015 S&Z |
| 3 | Botswana | 55 | US$249 m | -4% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 4 | Lesotho | 54 | US$131 m | -5% | National | US$326 |
| 5 | Zimbabwe | 53 | US$141 m | +8% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 6 | Eswatini | 53 | US$116 m | -0% | National | US$446 |
| 7 | OAPI (17 states) | 53 | US$8.0 m | +7% | National | US$1,563 S&Z |
| 8 | Egypt | 52 | US$14 m | -3% | National | US$2,278 |
| 9 | Malawi | 50 | US$24 m | -2% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 10 | Algeria | 48 | US$154 k | +56% | National | US$1,445 |
SA exports = South Africa's exports of these goods to the market in the last year. Ranked with the default weightings. Score 0–100 from South Africa's exports of the goods to the market, net imports, import growth, foreign trademark filings, where the goods are made, market size and the cost of protection. Costs are total fees (official and professional) to file in 5 classes; ARIPO costs are per country, plus US$301 once per ARIPO application; S&Z = S&Z's own all-in price. Goods are taken from the classes and specifications, so the ranking is indicative.
Trade data: CEPII BACI (version 202601, trade flows 2022–2024), Licence Etalab 2.0; aggregated and combined with other data by S&Z.
Protecting its top brands in Nigeria and OAPI with S&Z
| Brand | Classes | Nigeria | OAPI (17 states) |
|---|---|---|---|
| S'GOOD, S'NICE | 42 | US$8,526 | US$8,396 |
| CHICKEN LICKEN | 22 | US$4,466 | US$4,703 |
| EXPRESS | 6 | US$1,218 | US$1,748 |
| SOUL | 6 | US$1,218 | US$1,748 |
| CHICKEN INN | 4 | US$812 | US$1,378 |
S&Z all-in prices per brand in its number of classes, filing to registration.
TM Country Selection Rank the countries for your own goods and get the quotes.
Word marks you may have considered opposing
For Chicken Licken's five most-filed brands: word marks of other companies (not Chicken Licken's own group) that our similar word mark search, SimTM, found in the brand's own classes, and that we consider confusingly similar – from the earliest match found to today.
Similar to S'GOOD, S'NICE (classes 29, 30, 31, 42; searched 2018-01-31 to 2026-11-08)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to CHICKEN LICKEN (classes 29, 30, 42, 43; searched 2018-02-28 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to EXPRESS (classes 5, 29, 30, 31, 32, 42; searched 2018-01-31 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to SOUL (classes 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 43; searched 2020-05-27 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to CHICKEN INN (classes 29, 30, 31, 42; searched 2018-10-31 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similarity of the words only. Whether a mark could have been opposed depends on the goods and services, the reputation of the brand and the facts – S&Z can advise. New marks like these are what SimTM watch reports as they are published.
How S&Z can help you
S&Z does not just file trademarks. We are a technology-first firm that manages trademarks – analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected.
We manage your trademarks – not just file them
Analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected:
Filing and renewal at fixed, all-inclusive prices
S&Z prices – South African trademarks
| Filing, first class – incl. official fee, examination report, routine office action, acceptance, publication, registration and e-certificate | US$240 |
| Each additional class of the same mark, filed at the same time | US$225 |
| Renewal online, per class (every 10 years from filing) | R1,027 ≈ US$62.29 |
Renewal in rand; US$ at R16.49 per US$.
Chicken Licken's next five years of renewals
199 of Chicken Licken's registered marks reach their ten-year renewal date in 2027–2031. Renewed online with S&Z, that costs about US$12,396 over the five years.
Chicken Licken: frequently asked questions
What should Chicken Licken consider for its trademarks?
- Fewer new brands: new brand names fell from 2.0 to 1.2 a year – worth reviewing whether planned launches are being protected early enough.
- Renewals and use: keep track of the ten-year renewal dates and of marks that are no longer used – unused marks can be challenged after five years, and some may no longer be worth renewing.