Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                                                                                                                            Date: 20010123

                                                                                                                                           Docket: A-54-99

Matter involving sections 57 and 58

of the Trade-Marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13

CORAM:        DESJARDINS, J.A.

DÉCARY, J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU, J.A.

BETWEEN:

JEAN PATOU INC.

Appellant

- and -

LUXO LABORATORIES LIMITED

Respondent

Hearing held in Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, January 23, 2001.

Judgment pronounced at the hearing in Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, January 23, 2001.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:                               ALICE DESJARDINS J.A.


Date: 20010123

                                                                                                                                           Docket: A-54-99

Matter involving sections 57 and 58

of the Trade-Marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13

CORAM:        DESJARDINS, J.A.

DÉCARY, J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU, J.A.

BETWEEN:

JEAN PATOU INC.

Appellant

- and -

LUXO LABORATORIES LIMITED

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Pronounced at the hearing, Tuesday, January 23, 2001)

DESJARDINS J.A.

[1]         This is an appeal from a decision reported at [1998] F.C.J. No. 1910 (per Lutfy J., as he then was), in which the trial judge dismissed the appellant's application to strike out under subsection 57(1) of the Trade-Marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13 in opposition to the trade mark BOOSTER, of which the respondent is the registered owner.


[2]         The trial judge held that the trade mark BOOSTER did not give a clear description of the character or quality of the respondent's wares within the meaning of paragraph 12(1)(b) of the Act, that the trade mark was distinctive of the respondent's wares and that it had not been abandoned through non-use. In view of the evidence on the record, we agree with the trial judge's findings.

[3]         In regard to the appellant's alternative application, that the registration of the trade mark in the register be altered by the addition of words designed to restrict it to the "[Translation] hairdressing establishments market", we are of the opinion that the trial judge did not err in any way in dismissing this application. Even assuming, without deciding, that subsection 57(1) of the Act could allow the kind of alteration requested by the appellant, the circumstances in this case and the evidence did not warrant it.

[4]         This appeal will be dismissed with costs.

                       "Alice Desjardins"

                                                                       J.A.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

APPEAL DIVISION

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

FILE NO:                                                            A-54-99

STYLE:                                                                Jean Patou Inc.

- and -

Luxo Laboratories Limited

PLACE OF HEARING:                                   Ottawa, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING:                                      January 23, 2001

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF: Desjardins J.A. pronounced at the hearing

January 23, 2001

DATED:                                                              January 23, 2001

APPEARANCES:

Bruno Barrette                                        for the appellant

Kenneth D. McKay                                              for the respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Brouillette, Charpentier, Fortin

Montréal, Quebec                                                for the appellant

Sim, Hughes, Ashton & McKay

Toronto, Ontario                                                   for the respondent

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.