they would no longer have the Sennheiser name. The name goes with the division.
This does not always happen. In fact, it is not uncommon for a business to sell a division and keep the name (so the “name goes with the division” is not always correct).
Examples:
(1) Starbucks sold the packaged coffee and tea division to Nestle but, Starbucks kept the name. When you buy a pack of coffee at Starbucks, you are actually buying a Nestle product.
(2) IBM and Lenovo: When Lenovo bought the PC business from IBM ('05), IBM kept both the IBM and the Thinkpad name. Lenovo made and sold IBM PCs until 2007: After that, they got rid of the IBM brand on their products.
(3) Sharp sold the North America TV business to HiSense in 2015. Sharp kept the name and HiSense used it. Foxxconn bought the business from HiSense (and continued to use the Sharp name). In 2019 Sharp bought the NA TV business back.
(4) Versace glasses are owned by Luxotica but they license the name from Versace (who used to own that business long time ago)
Brands can be incredibly valuable, and when companies sell part of their business, they may choose to retain the brand and license it out. It’s not corporate law, it’s marketing. The Coca cola brand is worth over 100 billion $.
I haven’t seen any information on which parts of the Sennheiser branding will stay or go, but it might be more cost-effective for Sonova to either keep and license the brand or pay a licensing fee to the new owner to continue using the Sennheiser name. Brand creation is an extremely expensive thing to do, specially at a global scale.