“Dirt Shirt” Mark Thrown to the Hamper of Non-Used Trademarks Based on Varied Use, by Federal Court of Canada

“
DIRTSHIRT”MARKTHROWNTOTHEHAMPEROFNON-USEDTRADE-
MARKSBASEDONVARIEDUSE,BYFEDERALCOURTOFCANADA

STELLASYRIANOS*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENT&TRADEMARKAGENTS
TheFederalCourtofCanadarecentlygrantedanappealwherebytheApplicant
soughtanorderreversingtheRegistrar’srejectionofitsoppositiontothetrade-mark
DIRTSHIRTonvariousgroundsofopposition,includingdescriptivenessandnon-use
ofthemarkasappliedfor[CoastalCultureInc.v.WoodWheelerInc.,2007FC472
(DocketT-2208-05),O’KeefeJ.,May2,2007]
TheFacts
TheRespondent,WoodWheelerInc.(“Wheeler”)appliedtoregisterthetrade-mark
DIRTSHIRTonJune27
th,2002,inassociationwithavarietyofwaresandservices,
basedonuseinCanadasinceMay20th,1997.Amongstitslistofwareswassouvenir
T-shirtsdyedwithsoilfromPrinceEdwardIslandanditsservices,thecustom
manufactureandsaleofsuchclothingalongwithothernoveltyitems.
OnAugust13
th,2003,theApplicant,CoastalCultureInc.(“Coastal”)filedastatement
ofoppositionalleging,amongstothergroundsofopposition,(i)thetrade-markDIRT
SHIRTwasdescriptiveofthemethodofmanufactureoftheproductsinthatitreferred
togarmentsdyedtotakethecolourofdirtand(ii)itwasconfusingwithCoastal’s
previouslyusedtrade-markREDDIRTSHIRT.OnOctober5
th,2005,theRegistrar
rejectedtheoppositionafterhavingfoundthatCoastalhadnotmettheburdenof
provingitsallegations,hencethelatter’spresentappealbeforetheFederalCourtof
Canada.
TheFederalCourtJudgement

©CIPS,2007.*Lawyer,StellaSyrianosisamemberofLEGERROBICRICHARD,L.L.P.,amultidisciplinaryfirmof
lawyers,andpatentandtrademarkagents.PublishedintheJune2007issueoftheWIPR.Publication
142.206.

2
IndecidingwhetherornottheRegistrarerredinrejectingCoastal’soppositiontothe
registrationoftheDIRTSHIRTtrade-mark,JusticeO’Keefe,seizedoftheappeal,
examinedadditionalevidencefiledbyCoastal.TheevidencetenderedbyCoastal
containedobservationsbyitsbusinessmanageronthemannerinwhichWheeler’s
trade-markswereusedbothinitsstoreandviaitsInternetwebsite.Coastalsubmitted
thatthemarksusedwereTHEORIGINALP.E.I.DIRTSHIRTandP.E.I.DIRTSHIRT
ratherthanthemarkDIRTSHIRT.
TheCourtalsoconsideredtheadditionalevidencefiledbyWheelerintheformofan
affidavitsignedbyitspresidentandsoleshareholder,explainingthenatureof
Wheeler’sbusinessandthereasonsforthevarieduseofitsDIRTSHIRTtrade-mark.
Non-compliancewithdateoffirstuseallegedinapplication
OneofCoastal’ssubmissionsonappealrelatedtoRegistrarhavingerredinnot
consideringthegroundofoppositionunderparagraph30(b)oftheTrade-marksAct
whichprovidesthatanapplicantfortheregistrationofatrade-markbasedonusein
Canada,shallfilewiththeRegistraranapplicationcontainingthedateofsuchfirst
use.
SufficiencyofCoastal’spleadings
Priortodiscussingthemeritsofthisgroundofopposition,theCourtaddressedthe
issueoftheRegistrar’srefusaltoconsiderCoastal’ssubmissionsunderthisground
becauseitwasnotraisedinitsStatementofOpposition.TheCourtagreedwith
CoastalthattheRegistrarerredinrefusingtoconsiderthisgroundinsofarasany
deficiencyinCoastal’spleadingswascuredbytheevidenceitfiled.TheCourt
reiteratedtheprinciplethatconsiderationofthesufficiencyofpleadingsinisolationis
athingofthepast.
VarieduseofWheeler’sDIRTSHIRTtrade-mark
TheCourtproceededtoconsiderthemeritsofCoastal’soppositionchallenging
Wheeler’sallegationoffirstuseinCanadasinceMay20
th,1997.Coastalarguedthat
Wheeler’suseoftheDIRTSHIRTmarkwasnon-compliantusebecauseitwasvaried
usetothepointandthatWheelershouldnotbeabletoremovecomponentsofthe
trade-marksitused(THEORIGINALP.E.I.DIRTSHIRTandP.E.I.DIRTSHIRT)in
ordertorelyonthedateoffirstuseallegedinitsapplication,namelyMay20
th,1997.

3
Ontheotherhand,Wheelerarguedthevariationsonitstrade-markwereacceptable
deviationsinthatthedominantfeaturesofitsmark“DIRTSHIRT”remainedandthe
additionofthewords“P.E.I.”and“THEORIGINAL”wereminordeviations.
Indeterminingthenatureofthedeviations,theCourtfirstdetermined,basedonthe
evidencebeforeit,thatWheelerneverusedtheDIRTSHIRTmarkalonebutrather
withtheaddedelements“P.E.I.”or“THEORIGINALP.E.I.”precedingthewords
“DIRTSHIRT”.Next,theCourtnotedthattheword“P.E.I.”waswritteninthesame
fontandsizeasthewords“DIRTSHIRT”whilethewords“THEORIGINAL”were
smalleranddisplayedabovethewords“P.E.I.DIRTSHIRT”.
TheCourttooknoteofWheeler’sexplanationthatthewords“THEORIGINAL”were
addedtotheDIRTSHIRTmarkinordertodistinguishitswaresfromthoseofother
vendorsandconsidereditaminordeviation.However,theCourtwasunableto
ignoretheevidencethatWheelerneversoldproductswithonlythemarkDIRT
SHIRT,absenttheword“P.E.I.”andheldthisdeviationtobemorethanminor.
Ingrantingtheappeal,settingasidetheRegistrar’sdecisionanddirectingthelatterto
refuseWheeler’sapplicationfortheregistrationoftheDIRTSHIRTtrade-mark,the
CourtdidnotdealwiththeotherissuesraisedbyCoastal,suchasdescriptiveness.
Conclusion
Itistritelawthatwithanyvarieduse,theownerofatrademarkcouldfinditself
playingwithfire.Caselawhasroutinelydemonstratedtheperilsassociatedwith
unacceptablevarieduseofatrade-markwithinthecontextofadministrative
cancellationproceedings:theexpungementoftheowner’strade-markregistration
fromtheregister.However,inthepresentcase,theCourt’sdecisionisauseful
reminderoftheconsequencesofsuchvarieduseatamuchearlierstage,thatis,
duringthecourseofthetrade-markapplicationprocess.

4
ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesde
commercevouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdela
propriétéintellectuelledanstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielset
modèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marquesdecertificationet
appellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;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
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
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