A Poor Return on Investment : the Ontario Teachers’ Pension

2012-03-15

ROBIC,LLPwww.robic.ca
info@robic.com
MONTREAL
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE-8thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.:+1514987-6242Fax:+1514845-7874QUEBEC
2828LaurierBoulevard,Tower1,Suite925
Quebec,Quebec,CanadaG1V0B9
Tel.:+1418653-1888Fax.:+1418653-0006

APOORRETURNONINVESTMENT:THEONTARIOTEACHERS’PENSION
FUND’SDESCRIPTIVETRADE-MARKANDTHEFEDERALCOURTOFAPPEAL

A.SASHAMANDY*
ROBIC,LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENT&TRADEMARKAGENTS

Whenisatrade-markclearlydescriptiveoftheservicesassociatedwithitsuse?
Whenassessingthedescriptivenessofatrade-mark,whatconsiderationmustbe
giventothe“characterorquality”oftheserviceassociatedwithitsuse?Thesewere
amongsomeofthequestionstheCanadianFederalCourtofAppealhadtograpple
withinOntarioTeachersPensionPlanBoardv.Canada(AttorneyGeneral)[
2012
FCA60]
,whichwasrenderedonFebruary21,2012.

ThiscasedoesnotrevisitthetestfordescriptivenessofamarkinCanada,butmay
beofinteresttothosepractitionersworkinginthefieldoftrade-marksassociated
withfinancialservices.
Facts
TheOntarioTeachers’PensionFundisahugefinancialplayerinCanada.TheFund
managesthepensionbenefitsoftheprovinceofOntario’s173,000elementaryand
secondaryschoolteachersand11,000pensioners.Itdoessoverywell,havingnet
assetsof$107.5billionandrepeatedlybeatingbenchmarkreturns,atleastbyits
ownreckoning.ItsinvestmentsandpositionsaremarketmakersinCanadaand
touchonavarietyofeconomicsectorsincludinggovernmentandcommercialpaper,
realestate,andsomeiconicCanadiancompaniessuchasMapleLeafSports&
EntertainmentLtd.,ownersoftheTorontoRaptorsandTorontoMapleLeafs[
Although
oneofthemostpopularandfinanciallysuccessfulfranchisesintheNationalHockey
League,theTorontoMapleLeafshavenotwonaStanleyCupsince1967.].An
enterpriseofthisstaturewillcertainlytrytoprotectitsIPassets.

OnJune20,2002theOntarioTeachers’PensionFundBoard(orsimply“theBoard”)
filedanapplicationtoregisterthetrade-markTEACHERS’usedinassociationwith
thefollowingservices:“Administrationofapensionplan,managementand
investmentofapensionfundforteachersinOntario.”Anexaminer’sreportissued
citingthemarkas“eitherclearlydescriptiveordeceptivelymisdescriptiveofthe

©CIPS,2012.*OfROBIC,LLP,amultidisciplinaryfirmoflawyers,patentandtrademarkagents.Publishedat
(2012),26:4WorldIntellectualPropertyReport.Publication142.262.

characteroftheservicesinassociationwithwhich
itisintendedtobeused,sinceit
clearlydescribesthatitisapensionfundforteachers”andthusnotregistrable
pursuanttos.12(1)(b)oftheTrade-marksAct.

TheBoardfoughtthisdecisionovermanyyearsuntiltheFederalCourtofCanada
ultimatelysidedwiththeRegistrarofTrade-Marksandheldthemarktobeclearly
descriptiveandthusunregistrable.TheBoard,astheappellants,appealedthe
FederalCourt’sdecisionwhichledtothepresentjudgment.

StatutoryProvisions
TherelevantprovisionoftheActreadsasfollows:
12.(1)Subjecttosection13,atrade-markisregistrableifitisnot
[…]
(b)whetherdepicted,writtenorsounded,eitherclearlydescriptiveor
deceptivelymisdescriptiveintheEnglishorFrenchlanguageofthe
characterorqualityofthewaresorservicesinassociationwithwhich
itisusedorproposedtobeusedoroftheconditionsoforthe
personsemployedintheirproductionoroftheirplaceoforigin;

DecisionsoftheRegistrarandtheFederalCourt

TheRegistrarfoundthatthetrade-markTEACHERS’wasclearlydescriptiveofthe
characterortheservicesofferedbytheBoard:“[T]hetrade-markwas‘anapttrade
termfordescribingtheintrinsiccharacteroftheadministration,managementand
investmentofaplan/fundforteachersand,assuch,shouldbeleftavailablefor
otherstouse,sincedescriptivewordsarethepropertyofallandcannotbe
appropriatedbyonepersonfortheirexclusiveuse’”.

UponappealbytheBoard,JusticeMandaminoftheFederalCourtlargelyagreed
withtheRegistrar.TheBoardproducedadditionalevidencebeforetheFederalCourt
thatwasnotbeforetheRegistrar.TheFederalCourtthereforedecidedtoreconsider
thequestionofdescriptivenessanewinlightofthisnewevidence,ratherthanto
simplyperformajudicialreviewoftheRegistrar’sdecision.

JusticeMandaminthenreviewedtheapplicablelegalprinciplesgoverningtrade-
markdescriptiveness.First,thetrade-markmustbeconsideredinthecontextofthe
waresandservicesassociatedwiththetrade-mark.Inthepresentcase,thecontext
wasdefinedasfollows:TheapplicantistheOntarioTeachers’PensionPlanBoard.Itsstaff
isthefinancialmanagerswhoadminister,manageandinvestavery
largepensionfund,thepensionfundofOntarioteachers.The
Ontarioteachersmaybedescribedasthepossibleendconsumersof
thefinancialservicesprovidedbythefinancialmanagersofthe

OntarioTeachers’PensionPlanBoard.Theteachers
ofOntario,
workingorretired,mayalsobedescribedasthebeneficialownersof
thepensionfunditself.Inaddition,thevariousenterpriseswhich
seektohavethepensionfundsinvestedintheirventuresmayalso
bedescribedaspossibleconsumers.

JusticeMandaminthenstatedthatthemarkwasnotclearlydescriptive“ofthe
conditionsoforthepersonsemployedintheproductionoftheservicesortheirplace
oforigin.”However,thisdidnotprecludethemarkfrombeingclearlydescriptiveof
thecharacterorqualityoftheservicesassociatedwithitsuse,asprovidedunder
s.12(1)(b)oftheAct.JusticeMandaminstatedthatthewords“characterorquality
ofthewaresorservice”were“meanttodescribeadistinguishingorprominent
featureofthewaresorservicesofferedinassociationwiththetrade-mark.”Hethen
statedthatatrade-markwhich“clearlydescribesaprominentcharacteristicofthe
waresof[sic]serviceswillcomewithintheprohibitionagainstregistrationin
paragraph12(1)(b).”
JusticeMandaminthenassessedtheinitialimpressiongivenbythetrade-markin
themindofareasonablepersonandinthecontextofthewaresandservices
associatedtherewith.TheimpressionofonewhothinksofthetermTEACHERS’in
thecontextofthe“administrationofapensionplan,managementandinvestmentof
apensionfundforteachersinOntario”,intheeyesoftheFederalCourtwasas
follows:“Onewouldmorereadilythinkofwhomthepensionplanisfor,inthiscase
theteachers,ratherthanwhothepensionfundisadministeredby,thefinancial
managers”.Therefore,asthewordTEACHERS’describesaprominent
characteristicoftheservicesprovided–namely,whotheservicesarefor(i.e.
teachers)-itisclearlydescriptive.
Inlightofhisfinding,theFederalCourtupheldtheRegistrar’sdecision,and
dismissedtheBoard’sappeal.
JudgementoftheFederalCourtofAppeal

OnappealbeforetheCourtofAppeal,theBoardessentiallycontestedthefindingof
descriptivenessandarguedthatJusticeMandaminwasinconsistentbecausehe
foundthemarktobeclearlydescriptiveunders.12(1)(b),eventhoughheconcluded
thatitdidnotclearlydescribethespecificservicesassociatedwiththemark.

JusticeNadon,inwritingforaunanimousmajorityoftheCourtofAppeal,didnot
agree.TheCourtofAppealfoundnoinconsistencyinJusticeMandamin’sreasons:
WhileitistruetheJudge,atparagraph41ofhisReasons,statedthat
heagreedwiththeappellantthatthewordTEACHERS’didnot
clearlydescribetheservicesofferedbytheappellant,itcannotbe
said,astheappellantsuggests,thatthisshouldhaveledtheJudge
toallowitsappeal.WhentheJudge’sstatementisreadwiththe

paragraphsofhisReasonsthatfollow,itbecomesc
learthathewas
notfindingthatthetrade-markwasnot“clearlydescriptive”withinthe
meaningoftheAct.
[…]
Indeed,intheparagraphsfollowingparagraph41ofhisReasons,the
JudgedealtwiththequestionofwhetherthewordTEACHERS’was
clearlydescriptiveofthecharacterorqualityoftheservicesin
associationwithwhichthetrade-markwasused.Inotherwords,his
examinationofthewordTEACHERS’relatedtotheadministrationof
apensionplanorpensionfundledhimtotheconclusionthatit
clearlydescribedthecharacteroftheservices,i.e.adistinguishingor
prominentfeatureofthoseservices,thuspreventingthetrade-mark
frombecomingregistrable.

JusticeNadonthereforeconfirmedtheapproachtakenbytheFederalCourtandits
applicationoftheappropriatelegaltest.
JusticeNadonconcludedthattheimpressionmadeuponareasonablepersonofthe
wordTEACHERS’,inthecontextofthemark,wouldbethattheBoard“administers
apensionplanforteachersandprovidesmanagementandinvestmentservicesfora
pensionfundforthoseteachers.”ThusthewordTEACHERS’,whenconsideredin
associationwiththeservicesprovidedbytheBoard,clearlydescribesa
characteristicoftheseservices,thatis,thattheservicesprovidedareforteachers.
Consequently,themarkwasheldtobedescriptiveandtheappealwasdismissed.

Conclusion

ThisdecisionoftheCourtofAppealoffersausefulsummaryoftheproperlegaltest
regardingdescriptivetrade-marks.Trade-markpractitionersshouldnotetheFederal
Court’sconclusionthattheexpression“characterorqualityofthewaresorservice”
ins.12(1)(b)is“meanttodescribeadistinguishingorprominentfeatureofthewares
orservicesofferedinassociationwiththetrade-mark.”Thistestwasconfirmedby
theCourtofAppeal.Inthefinancialsector,forexample,thisdistinguishingor
prominentfeatureoftheservicesprovidedcaninclude,asinthepresentcase,the
beneficiaryofsuchservices.

ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommerce
vouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelle

danstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustriel
setmodèlesutilitaires;marques
decommerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,
propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;informatique,
logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentions
végétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchiseset
transfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;
marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérificationdiligente
etaudit.ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicated
since1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:
patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksand
indicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,
neighbouringrights;computer,softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,
pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,know-how,competitionandanti-
trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionand
businesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;
duediligence.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDE
LAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOUR
IDEASTOTHEWORLD
Trade-marksofROBIC,
LLP(“ROBIC”)