Principal, Lawyer, Trademark Agent
Memory … is the diary that we all carry about with usOscar Wilde
Barry Gamache specializes in trademark law.
He has practiced in this field for almost three decades. He was named among the best lawyers in Canada in the field of intellectual property by the Best Lawyers in Canada 2010 publication. He has been involved in numerous disputes that have had impact on trademark law.
Barry Gamache is the author of numerous articles on topics of interest relating to trademarks. He is one of the editors of the Canadian Trade-Marks Act Annotated. Outside the office, he is a lecturer at Université de Montréal’s Faculty of Law where he has been involved with the moot court program since 1998.
Barry Gamache is an active litigator. He has represented clients before various courts including the Court of Appeal of Québec, the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. He has also participated in numerous hearings before the Opposition Board of the Trade-marks Office. Several rulings in cases argued by Barry Gamache have overturned long-established practices in intellectual property and are now relied upon by the legal community.
For example, in 2004 and 2005, he successfully argued before the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal the case of Effigi Inc. v. Attorney General of Canada (2004 FC 1000, 2005 FCA 172), which transformed Canada into a “first come, first served” country when considering trademark applications filed in the Trademarks Office. Because of this ruling, the Trademarks Office set aside a much criticized fifty-year-old practice that used to create many uncertainties for trademark applicants.
He was also involved in a major trademark case that was heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. In Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin v. Boutiques Cliquot Ltée,  1 S.C.R. 824, the country’s highest court clarified the rules relating to the protection of famous trademarks in Canada. The decision now remains a beacon for all trademark practitioners on both this issue and general principles of trademark law.
Barry Gamache advises clients in order to better protect their interests and assets, while never losing sight of their respective business realities. He is constantly attentive to clients’ needs.
- Member of the Québec Bar (1987)
- Bachelor of Civil Law (LL.B.), Université de Montréal (1986)
- Canadian Bar Association (CBA)
- WTR (World Trademark Review) 1000 2021- 2024: Enforcement and Litigation
- Best Lawyers 2024 : Lawyer of the year in Intellectual Property Law (Montréal)
- Best Lawyers 2009 - 2024 : Intellectual Property
- LEXPERT Special Edition 2023: Technology and Health Sciences
- Who's Who Legal: Canada 2022 (trademarks, transport shipping)
- Martindale-Hubbell 2021 : Distinguished - Peer Rated for High Professional Achievement
- The Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2021 : Consistently Recommended in Intellectual Property
- WTR (World Trademark Review) Global Leaders 2020
- LEXPERT : Leading Agribusiness and Cannabis Lawyer in Canada 2020
- The Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2019-2020 : Consistently Recommended- Intellectual Property and Litigation and Intellectual Property
- Business Law
- Confidentiality and Trade Secrets
- Trademarks Litigation
- Unfair Competition Litigation
- Charter of the French Language
- Comparative Advertising
- Filing and Prosecuting Trademark Applications
- Misleading Advertising
- Trademark Availability (Searches and Opinions)
- Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings
- Defedant and its officers found liable for trade-mark infringement in high times case, rules Canada’s federal court
- Alleged descriptiveness of Canada’s healthiest grocery store trade-mark examined by registrar in opposition case
- Court Examines Allegation of Trade-Mark Infringement in Perkopolis Case
- Registrar Decides Fate of Trade-Mark Registrations for Services Submitted as Goods in Quickstart Expungement Case
- Mootness Issue Examined by Federal Court in Appeal from Opposition Board’s Decision
- Court Gives Effect to Pinnacles Word Mark Owned by Winery in Opposition Case
- Lingayen Trade-Mark Held Descriptive and Therefore Invalid in Infrigement Case, Rules Federal Court
- Use as a Company Name Distinct from Use of a Trade-Mark Rules Federal Court of Appeal in Medos Expungement Case
- Official Marks Unenforceable Rules Federal Court in Litigation Over “Spirit Bear”
- Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Absence of Infringement in Word “Conservator” Case
- View more publications