Clearing One Confusion Before Another: Using the Appropriate Language in a Bilingual Country When Applying a Test for Confusion

1
CLEARINGONECONFUSIONBEFOREANOTHER:USINGTHEAPPROPRIATE
LANGUAGEINABILINGUALCOUNTRYWHENAPPLYINGATESTFORCONFUSION

AdamMizera*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,Lawyers,
ROBIC,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.(514)9876242-Fax(514)8457874
www.robic.ca-info@robic.com
TheFederalCourtofCanadarecentlyrenderedadecisiononacasethat
hadreturnedfromtheFederalCourtofAppealwithanordertodetermine
theriskofconfusionbetweentwotrade-marksforantidepressantpillsPAXIL
andIXEL(PierreFabreMédicamentv.SmithklineBeechamCorporation,2004
FC811(June7,2004,Tremblay-LamerJ.)).TheCourtruledthatthereisno
tangibleriskofconfusionbetweenthetwotrade-marksandorderedthatthe
trade-markIXELberegistered.
TheapplicantPierreFabreMédicamenthadseenitsinitialapplicationto
registerthetrade-markIXELrejectedbytheRegistrarfollowinganopposition
bySmithklinebasedonitsregistrationforPAXIL.Uponanappealofthe
Registrar’sdecision,theFederalCourtrejectedtheoppositionandordered
theRegistrartoregisterthetrade-markIXEL.
TheFederalCourtofAppealallowedanappealofthedecisionand
concludedthatboththeRegistrarandtrialjudgehaderredwithrespectto
theappropriatetesttousetodeterminetheriskofconfusion.TheCourt
statedthat,oncethereisariskofconfusionineitherofCanada’stwoofficial
languages,atrade-markcannotberegistered.AccordingtotheCourt,there
isonlyoneapplicablethree-steptesttoapply:(1)isthereariskofconfusion
fortheaverageFrancophoneconsumer,(2)theaverageAnglophone
consumer,and(3)insomespecialcircumstances,theaveragebilingual
consumer.TheCourtthendeterminedthatthetrialjudgeandregistrarerred
intransformingthethirdprongofthistestintoanindependenttest,by
examiningtheissuefromthepointofviewofthebilingualconsumeronly.
Sincetheopposingpartiesagreedthattherewasnoriskofconfusionforthe
averageFrancophoneconsumer,theFederalCourtwasthenorderedto

©LEGERROBICRICHARD,2004*PublishedinWorldTrademarkLawReport.Publication293.20.

2
determinewhethertherewasariskofconfusionbetweenthetrade-marksfor
anAnglophoneconsumer.
TheFederalCourt,inthecaseatbar,formulatedthetestithadtoapplyin
thefollowingmanner:isitmorethanlessprobablethat,asafirstimpression,
inthemindoftheaverageAnglophoneconsumerhavingavague
recollection,therewouldbeatangibleriskofconfusionbetweenthetrade-
marksIXELandPAXIL.
Inthiscaseinvolvingprescriptionmedication,theaverageconsumerwas
heldtoincludethedoctorprescribingthemedication,thepharmacistaswell
asthepatient.TheCourtthenspecifiedthatconfusionisquitedifficultto
establishinthefieldofprescriptionmedication.
TheCourtexamineddifferentcriteriamentionedinsection6(5)oftheTrade-
MarksActusedtodeterminewhethertrade-marksareconfusing,including
distinctiveness,theextenttowhichtheyhavebecomeknownandbeenin
use,thenatureofthewareandthenatureofthetrade.However,after
establishingthattherewaslittleresemblancebetweenthetrade-marksin
appearanceorideassuggestedbythem,mostoftheCourt’sanalysis
concentratedonthedegreeofresemblanceinsound.
Inaccordancewiththeconclusiondrawnfromtheapplicant’sexpert
evidence,theCourtfoundthatthefirstsyllableofthewordPAXILcouldnot
beconfusedwiththefirstsyllableofIXELphoneticallyinEnglish,aconclusion
similartotheonemadeinthefirstFederalCourtdecisiononthiscasebased
onthepointofviewofabilingualFrancophone-Anglophoneconsumer.Even
thoughthesecondsyllableforbothwordswouldseemsimilarin
pronunciationforanAnglophoneconsumer,theinitialsyllabledifferenceisso
greatthatanyresemblancebetweenthetwophoneticallyremains
improbable.Hence,thefinalconclusionbytheFederalCourthasnot
changedwithrespecttoitsoriginaldecision,butthistime,onecansaythat
theproperlanguageinitsreasoninghasbeenused.

3

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;etce,tantauCanadaquailleursdanslemonde.La
maîtrisedesintangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicated
since1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectual
property:patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,
certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,
artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,softwareand
integratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;
tradesecrets,know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingand
technologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,
publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;duediligence;in
Canadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslivehere.
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