Anton Piller Order Vacated Due to Failure by Counsel to Meet Procedural Requirements

1
ANTONPILLERORDERVACATEDDUETOFAILUREBYCOUNSELTOMEET
PROCEDURALREQUIREMENTS

AlexandraSteele*
LEGERROBICRICHARD
,L.L.P.
Lawyers,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Victoria-Square–BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.(514)9876242–Fax(514)8457874
info@robic.com-www.robic.ca

TheFederalCourtofCanadarecentlyvacatedanAntonPillerOrderbased
on,amongstothers,thefailurebythePlaintiff’scounseltofiletherequisite
affidavitsoftheattendingandsupervisingsolicitor,asrequiredbytheAnton
PillerOrder.[AyngaranInternationalVideo&AudioInc.v.UniversalDVDInc.,
2006FC948,(VonFinckenstein,J.,August2,2006.)]
TheFacts
Plaintiffpurportstobetheownerofthecopyrightsinnumerous
cinematographicworks.Italsoimportsandsellsthecinematographicworks
throughitsretailstores.
PlaintiffinitiatedanactionagainstseveralDefendants,allegingthattheyhad
infringeditscopyrightsincertaincinematographicworks.Plaintiffalsosought
andobtainedanAntonPillerOrderwhichwasexecutedagainstthe
Defendants.ThePlaintiffwasrequiredtobringamotionforreviewofthegrant
andexecutionoftheOrderwithinfourteendaysoftheexecution,whichitdid.
DefendantssoughttohavetheAntonPillerOrdervacatedonseveral
grounds,includingtheimproperexecutionoftheOrder.
TheFederalCourtJudgement
Onthemotionforreview,theDefendantsraisedthefactthat,contrarytothe
AntonPillerOrder,thematerialsfiledbythePlaintiffonthereviewmotiondid
notcontainanyaffidavitofthesupervisingandattendingsolicitor;
furthermore,theonlydocumentrecountingtheprocessofexecutionofthe

©CIPS,2006.*Lawyer,AlexandraSteeleisamemberofLEGERROBICRICHARD,L.L.P.,amultidisciplinaryfirmof
lawyers,andpatentandtrademarkagents.Publication142.193.

2
AntonPillerOrderwasa“report”filedbyPlaintiff’sattorneys,whoincidentally
alsoarguedthereviewoftheexecutionoftheOrder.
JusticevonFinckensteinwasseizedofthereviewmotion.Hefirstconsidered
theproceduralobjectionsraisedbytheDefendantsandrulesthemtobewell-
founded.IntheCourt’sview,theAntonPillerOrderclearlysetoutthe
requirementthatthesupervisingandattendingsolicitorwasobligatedtofile
anaffidavitpursuanttotheexecutionoftheOrder.Theonlydocuments
attestingtothemannerinwhichtheOrderwasexecutedwerePlaintiff’s
attorneys’“reports”,bothofwhichweresignedbycounselforthePlaintiff,
includingcounselwhoarguedbeforeJusticevonFinckenstein.
AlthoughthereisnorequirementinCanadathattheattendingand
supervisingsolicitorbeseparateorindependentfromcounselforthePlaintiff,
(asisthecase,forexample,intheUnitedKingdom),theCourtstatedthatthe
“reports”filedinsupportofthereviewmotionwereinsufficientastheydidnot
enabletheCourttoascertainhowtheOrderwasexecutedandwhatwas
seized.Theothermaterialsfiledinsupportofthereviewmotion,suchasthe
affidavitsofinterpreters,officersofthePlaintiffandaccompanyingpolice
officers,allofwhomassistedintheexecutionoftheOrder,werealso
insufficientastheycontainednodirectevidenceofhowtheOrderwas
executedandwhatwasseized.
GiventhatanAntonPillerOrderisanextraordinaryremedy,failurebyPlaintiff
tofilethesupervisingandattendingsolicitors’affidavitconstitutedafatalflaw
tothePlaintiff’sreviewmotionandthereforetotheAntonPilleritself.TheCourt
alsoreiteratedthewellestablishedprinciplethatapersoncannotactas
counselandgiveevidenceatthesametime.Basedontheseprocedural
deficiencies,JusticevonFinckensteinconcludedthattheexecutionofthe
AntonPillerOrderwasimproperlyconductedandthattheOrdershouldbe
vacated.
Ifheweretobewrongontheissueoftheprocedure,JusticevonFinckenstein
alsoconsideredthereviewoftheOrderfromasubstantivelawperspective.
TherearefivecriteriathattheCourtshouldconsiderattimeofreviewofAnton
PillerOrder(re:NetboredInc.v.AveryHoldingsInc.,2005FC1405(F.C.)):
“1.ThePlaintiffmustshowanextremelystrongprimafacie
case;
2.Damage,potentialoractual,mustbeveryseriousforthe
applicant;
3.Theremustbeclearandconvincingevidencethatthe
Defendantshaveintheirpossessionincriminatingdocuments
andthatthereisarealpossibilitythattheymaydestroysuch
materialbeforeanapplicationinterpartescouldbemade;

3
4.TheinspectionwoulddonorealharmtotheDefendantor
hiscase;and
5.Whetherfullandfrankdisclosureofallrelevantfactswas
madetothejudgegrantingtheOrder.”
Uponreviewingthefactsofthecase,JusticevonFinckensteinfoundthat
Plaintiffhadnotestablishedastrongprimafaciecase:hefoundthatthere
werediscrepanciesinthechainsoftitleforthevariouscopyrightsinsuitand
thereforetherewasdoubtintheCourt’smindastowhetherPlaintiffhad
sufficientrightstothecopyrightsinlitigation.
SincethePlaintifffailedtoestablishthattheAntonPillerOrderwasproperly
executedandthat,inanyevent,itdidnothaveastrongprimafaciecase
sufficienttojustifytheissuanceofanAntonPillerOrder,JusticeVon
FinckensteinvacatedtheOrderwithcoststofollow.
TheCourt,inobiter,wrotethatnotwithstandinghisdeterminationonthe
motionforreview,hecouldnotreadilyaccepttheDefendants’submission
thattheywereauthorizedtomakecopiesofthecinematographicworksin
suit.HethereforespecificallysetoutinhisjudgementthatthePlaintiffwould
beabletoapplyforanotherAntonPillerOrder,ortoproceeddirectlywithits
actionforcopyrightinfringement.Healsodelayedthereturnoftheseized
goodsforaperiodofonemonthtogivethePlaintifftheopportunityto
remedythesubstantiveandproceduraldefectsandtobringanothermotion
fortheissuanceofanAntonPillerOrder,ifnecessary.
Conclusion
TherehasrecentlybeenaflurryofdecisionsinCanadaregardingAntonPiller
Orders,mostnotablyarulingbytheSupremeCourtofCanadainCelanese
CanadaInc.v.MurrayDemolitionCorp.,2006SCC36(S.C.C.).
TheSupremeCourtofCanadaandtheFederalCourtshaveclearlystated
thatthereisaheavyburdenontheshouldersofcounselswhoseekand
obtainAntonPillerOrderstoensurethatthepartiesputtheir“bestfoot
forward”whenapplyingforsuchanOrder,andatthetimeofreviewofthe
Order,theymustdemonstratethatithasbeenflawlesslyexecuted.
Alloftherelevantfacts,eventhosethatmayadverselyaffectthecase,
shouldbedisclosedtotheCourt.Failuretorespectthetermsandconditions
ofanAntonPillerOrderand/ortomakehonestandfrankdisclosurestothe
Courtmayinevitablyresultinitsdismissal.Inthisparticularcase,theFederal
Courtorderedcoststobeinthecause,butthereareothercaseswherethe

4
dismissalofanAntonPillerOrdercarriedaveryhighawardofcoststothe
successfuldefendant.
TheserecentdecisionsareareminderthatanAntonPillerOrderisan
exceptionalremedy,grantedinexceptionalcircumstancesandthereforethe
partiesandtheircounselmustshowexceptionalcomplianceanddeference
toitssubstantiveandproceduralrequirements.

5
ROBIC,ungroupedavocatsetdagentsdebrevetsetdemarquesde
commercevouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdela
propriétéintellectuelledanstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielset
modèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marquesdecertificationet
appellationsdorigine;droitsdauteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdelartisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;
biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsde
commerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchisesettransfertsde
technologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;
marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérification
diligenteetaudit.ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademark
agentsdedicatedsince1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofall
fieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;
trademarks,certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightand
entertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,
softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplant
breeders;tradesecrets,know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,
franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionandbusiness
law;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;
duediligence.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLULINVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELA
PLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTO
THEWORLD