Filing of Evidence on Appeal in Trade-Mark Proceedings Originating from the Registrar No Longer Possible in Certain Circumstances?


FILINGOFEVIDENCEONAPPEALINTRADE-MARKPROCEEDINGSORIGINATING
FROMTHEREGISTRARNOLONGERPOSSIBLEINCERTAINCIRCUMSTANCES?

By
BarryGamache
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
ArecentdecisionoftheTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtofCanadahasset
asidealongstandingpracticethatnewevidencecouldalwaysbefiledby
anappellantbeforetheTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtofCanadasitting
onappealofdecisionsrenderedbytheTradeMarksOppositionBoard(Brain
TumorFoundationofCanadavsTheStarlightFoundationetal.,T-773-99,
December7,1999(FederalCourt,TrialDivision,MacKay,J.)).
Undersubsection56(1)ofCanada’sTrade-marksAct(R.S.C.1985,c.T-13),an
appealliestotheTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtofCanadafromany
decisionoftheRegistrar(whetheritbefromoneortheotheroftheRegistrar’s
administrativesectionsi.e.theOppositionBoardortheSection45
ExpungementDivision)withintwomonthsfromthedateonwhichnoticeof
thedecisionispassedbytheRegistrarorwithinsuchfurthertimeastheCourt
mayallow,eitherbeforeoraftertheexpirationofthetwomonths.
Furthermore,subsection56(5)oftheActstates:”Onanappealunder
subsection(1),evidenceinadditiontothatadducedbeforetheRegistrar
maybeadducedandtheFederalCourtmayexerciseanydiscretionvested
intheRegistrar”.
Ina1995decisionthattheFederalCourtofAppealdescribedasan
“exception”threeyearslater,theTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtconsidered
thatusebyParliamentinsubsection56(5)oftheTrade-marksActofthewords
“inadditiontothatadducedbeforetheRegistrar”meantthatinordertofile
evidenceonappealbeforetheFederalCourt,evidencemusthavebeen
filedbeforetheRegistrar(PrimaxComputerCorp.vsPrimaxElectronic(U.S.A.)
Inc.(1995),62C.P.R.(3d)75,(F.C.T.D.Denault,J.)(seecommentsappearing
at(1996),10WIPR128-129)).
InCinnabon,Inc.vsYoo-HooofFloridaCorp.(1998),82C.P.R.(3d)513(F.C.A.,
Desjardins,DécaryandNoëlJJ.A.),theFederalCourtofAppeal,onan


appealfromaTrialDivisiondecisionwhichitselfwasonappealfromasection
45summaryexpungementdecisionfromtheRegistrarofTrade-marks,
analyzedthewordsinsubsection56(5),atpage519:”Thewordsthemselves(
“inadditionto”)arenotasclearastheappellantsays.[8]Theydonotin
themselvesnecessarilyimplythattherehadtobepriorevidencetowhich
furtherevidencecouldbeadded.Thefactisthatifoneisaddedtozero,the
resultwillbeone;therewasanadditionalthoughtechnicallyspeakingthere
wasnothingtoadditto.Iwouldnotreadilygivetotheword”addition”a
meaningthatdefiesthebasicrulesofarithmetic.[9]Also,andperhapsmore
importantly,theproposedinterpretationofthewords”inadditionto”doesnot
resistanexaminationofthecontext–thatoftheappealprocesssetoutin
section56–inwhichtheyarefound,nordoesitresistanexaminationofthe
context–thatofaproceedingundersection45–inwhichtheyaretobe
applied.[10]Section56isaprovisionofgeneralapplication.Theappeal
processitestablishesisnotqualifiedinanyway;itappliestoallappealsby
whateverpartyfromanyproceedingbeforetheRegistrar.Itisnotdirected
solelytodecisionsmadeundersection45norisitreservedtoregistered
ownerswhohavefiledsomeevidenceintheproceedingbeforethe
Registrar.Thewordsusedaremeanttobewideenoughtoencompassany
peculiarityassociatedwiththeparticulartypeofproceedingatissueinthe
appeal.”.
Reviewingvariousdecisionswhichhavebeenreachedafterlittle,ifany,
discussionontheissue,theFederalCourtofAppealinCinnabon,Inc.founda
clearlineofauthoritytotheeffectthatsubsection56(5)shouldnotbestrictly
construedasagainstaregisteredownerinappealsrelatingtosection45
proceedings.TheCourtfurthernotedasimilarconsistentlineofauthority
governingtheinterpretationofsubsection56(5)inthecontextofopposition
proceedings.Itnotedhoweverthe“exception”ofthePrimaxcase.
AccordingtotheFederalCourtofAppeal,theCourtcanallowaregistered
ownertofileevidenceinsection45appealsevenifheorshedidnotfileany
beforetheRegistrar.
ThispracticehasnowbeenquestionedbyMr.JusticeMacKayinanappeal
fromanOppositionBoarddecisionwhichisalsogoverned,aspreviously
mentioned,bysubsection56(5)oftheTrade-marksAct.InBrainTumor
FoundationofCanada,therespondenthadfiledamotiontosetasidethe
affidavitfiledbytheappellant(theapplicantbeforetheRegistrar)under
subsection56(5)arguingthattheappellant,havingfailedtofileevidence
withtheRegistrar,shouldnotbepermittedtofileevidenceonappeal.The
respondenturgedthattheaffidavitevidencefiledbytheappellantwasthe
firstandnot”additional”evidenceprovidedbyit.TheCourtsidedwiththe
respondentstatingthatifthereisanoppositionandthatanapplicant


choosesnottoprovideanyevidenceforconsiderationbeforetheRegistrar,it
runstheriskofanunfavourabledecisionandthatdecision,ifappealed,may
becontestedbutnotbyrelyinguponevidencethatwasavailableandcould
havebeensubmittedtotheRegistrar.
TheCourtfurtherstated:”AsIconstruetheprocessundertheAct,an
applicantforregistrationofatrade-markwhoelectsnottoprovideevidence
tosupportitsapplicationinoppositionproceedingsinitiatedbeforethe
Registrarbytheownerofaregisteredtrade-mark,maynotcomplainifthe
Courtdeclinestoacceptevidencebyaffidavitonanappealfromthe
Registrar’sdecision.Thataffidavitisnot”evidenceinadditiontothatadduced
beforetheRegistrar”withinthemeaningofs-s.56(5)asthatprovisionrelates
toanappealfromadecisioninoppositionproceedings.Insuchacaseifthe
statutoryprocessistoberespected,”evidenceinadditiontothatadduced
beforetheRegistrar”onanappealmustbeadditionaltotheevidence
adducedbeforetheRegistrarbythesamepartywhenprovidedthe
opportunitytodosopursuanttos-s.38(7)”.
ItmightbearguedthatthedecisionsinCinnabon,Inc.andinBrainTumor
FoundationofCanadadonotofferdifferentoutlooksinthatthefirst
concernedanappealfromasummaryexpungementproceedingwhilethe
secondconcernedoppositionproceedings(althoughtheCourtofAppeal
didstateinCinnabon,Inc.thatsection56isaprovisionofgeneralapplication
andthattheprocessitestablishesappliestoallappealsfromanyproceeding
beforetheRegistrar).AfterBrainTumorFoundationofCanada,itappears
thattheissueofthedefinitiveinterpretationofsubsection56(5)oftheActhas
notbeensettledforthetimebeing.Asmattersnowstand,prudencewould
nowsuggesttoapartytofilesomeevidencebeforetheRegistrar(atleastin
oppositionproceedings)inordertoenableit,ifneedbe,tofile”evidencein
additiontothatadducedbeforetheRegistrar”beforetheFederalCourton
appeal.
Publishedat(2000),14W.I.P.R.43-44underthetitleCourtRulesonFilingof
EvidenceOnAppealFromOppositionBoard.
LEGERROBICRICHARD,2000.



ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevoué
depuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstousles
domaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marques
decertificationetappellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,
pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;
licences,franchisesettransfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroit
desaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérification
diligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaqu’ailleursdanslemonde.Lamaîtrisedes
intangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892tothe
protectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesigns
andutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightand
entertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,softwareand
integratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-
commerce,distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecution
litigationandarbitration;duediligence;inCanadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslivehere.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHEWORLD