Issue of Credibility Precludes the Granting of Summary Judgement, Federal Court Rules in Lepage Trade-Mark Infringement Case

1
ISSUEOFCREDIBILITYPRECLUDESTHEGRANTINGOFSUMMARYJUDGEMENT,
FEDERALCOURTRULESINLEPAGETRADE-MARKINFRINGEMENTCASE

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

ArecentdecisionofCanada’sFederalCourtconsideredcircumstanceswhen
asummaryjudgementcannotbegrantedtoaplaintiff,inatrade-mark
infringementcasebroughtbeforetheCourt.(HenkelCanadaCorporationv.
ConrosCorporation,2004FC1747(December17,2004,HugessenJ.)).
PlaintiffHenkelCanadaCorporation(“Henkel”)istheownerinCanadaofthe
trade-markLEPAGEwhichhasbeenusedthereinsincethe1880’sin
associationwithavarietyofadhesiveproducts(albeitnotontransparent
adhesivetape).Transparentadhesivetapeistheproductthatdefendant
ConrosCorporation(“Conros”)begansellinginCanada,in2002,in
associationwiththetrade-markLEPAGE’S.
InitsactionbeforeCanada’sFederalCourtagainstConros,Henkelalleged,
interalia.thatConros’useoftheLEPAGE’Strade-markwascontraryto
sections19and20ofCanada’sTrade-marksAct(R.S.C.1985,c.T-13).Section
19providesthattheregistrationofatrade-markinrespectofanywaresor
servicesgivesitsownertheexclusiverighttotheusethroughoutCanadaof
thetrade-markinrespectofthosewaresorservices.Foritspart,section20
statesthattherightoftheownerofaregisteredtrade-marktoitsexclusive
useshallbedeemedtobeinfringedbyapersonnotentitledtoitsusewho
sells,distributesoradvertiseswaresorservicesinassociationwithaconfusing
trade-markortrade-name.
HenkelappliedtotheCourtforasummaryjudgementandputforward
evidenceofitsvariousregistrations,initsname,foritsmanyLEPAGE-type
trade-marks;however,noneoftheseregistrationswereconsideredrelevant
underitssection19claim.Section19allowsaregisteredtrade-markownerto

LEGERROBICRICHARD,2005*LawyerwiththethelawfirmLEGERROBICRICHARD,g.p.andofthepatentandtrade-mark
agencyfirmROBIC,g.p.Publication064.171.

2
obtainreliefiftheinfringerusestheplaintiff’smarkasregisteredinassociation
withthosespecificwaresorservicesmentionedintheregistration.
TheCourtexaminedHenkel’svariousregistrations:the”LEPAGE’S”trade-mark
registeredonMarch19,1903coversadhesivesubstances,namelycements
andglues;theLEPAGE’Strade-markregisteredonApril23,1970covers
chemicalandchemicalcompositionsbeingadhesives,cements,gluesand
fillers,householdandindustrialcleaningcompositionsandsolvents,chemicals
andchemicalcompositionsbeingcoatingsnamelypreservatives,stainsand
finishes;theLEPAGEtrade-markregisteredonOctober17,1975covers
adhesives,sealantsandchemicalsandchemicalcompositionsbeing
coatingsnamely,preservatives,stainsandfinishes;whiletheLEPAGE’SDESIGN
trade-markregisteredonOctober1,1976coversadhesives,sealants,fillers
andchemicalsandchemicalcompositionsbeingcoatingsnamely,
preservatives,stainsandfinishes.
AsnoneofHenkel’sregistrationscoveredtransparentadhesivetape,
summaryjugdmentcouldnotbeobtainedonthatground.Moreover,with
referencetothe1903and1975registrations,ConrosusedthemarkLEPAGE’S
(withoutquotationmarks,inpossessiveform);therefore,the”LEPAGE’S”(with
quotationmarks)registrationsecuredin1903andtheLEPAGE(withoutthe‘S)
registrationsecuredin1975couldnotberelieduponinHenkel’ssection19
claim,asthetrade-markusedbyConroswasnotatakingofHenkel’smarks
registeredrespectivelyin1903and1975.
[AlthoughtheCourtdidnottakeadefinitivepositionastowhetherthe
quotationmarksformedpartofthe1903registration,itappearsthattheiruse
wascommonplacewhenregisteringatrade-markinCanadaduringthe
earlypartsofthetwentiethcentury;quotationmarksservedtoisolateand
identifythetrade-marktoberegistered.Thesequotationmarksappearingin
olderregistrationscantodaybedeleted,uponapplicationtotheRegistrarof
Trade-marks,iftheycastdoubtastotheextentofthemonopolyrights
grantedbyaspecificregistration.]
HavingdismissedHenkel’ssection19groundforsummaryjudgement,the
Courtconsideredthesection20groundandtheprotectiongrantedtothe
ownersofregisteredtrade-marksagainsttheuseofconfusinglysimilartrade-
marks.Onthelatterpoint,Conrostenderedexpertopinionevidence
purportingtodemonstratethatthetrade-marksatissuewerenotconfusing
becausetheparties’respectiveproductswereaimedatdifferentmarkets.
TheCourtwasnotpersuadedbythisevidencewhichwasdescribedasbeing
basedonanecdotalandimpressionisticfoundations.

3
TheCourtwouldhavebeenreadytograntplaintiff’smotionforsummary
judgementundersection20butrefrainedfromdoingsoinlightofarecent
decisionbytheFederalCourtofAppealinMacNeilEstatev.Canada,[2004]
3F.C.R.3(F.C.A.)whichprecludesajudgefrommakinganassessmentof
credibilityinanymotionforsummaryjudgement.Asareviewoftheevidence
inplaintiff’smotionforsummaryjudgementimpliedcommentingonthe
reliabilityandcredibilityofdefendant’sevidence,theCourtfeltthatsuch
matteroughtbesttobelefttotheTrialJudge.
TheCourtappearstohavemadethischoicereluctantlyandmadethe
followingcommentsontheissueofhow”credibility”istobeviewedand
assessed:”Iam(..)uncomfortablewiththeCourt’sapparentview[inMacNeil
Estate]thatonlyafulltrialinthetraditionalsenseisanadequatefactfinding
mechanism;boththisCourtandtheCourtofAppealexerciseaverylarge
partoftheiroriginaljurisdictioninmattersofjudicialreviewwhichfrequently
raisedisputedandcriticalquestionsoffactwhichareroutinelydecidedon
thebasisofaffidavitsandthecross-examinationsthereon.
WhilethisCourthasthepossibilityofconvertinganapplicationintoanaction,
thatoptionisnotopentotheFederalCourtofAppealandIamnotawareof
anycaseinwhichithasexerciseditsrelatedpowertoorderthetrialofan
issueonthegroundthatitcannotfairlyfindthefactsonthebasisofaffidavits
andcross-examination.InmyexperienceaCourt’sfact-findingcapacity,
especiallywhereexpertsareinvolved,israrelyifeverdependantuponthe
opportunityofseeingandhearingwitnessesinthebox.Itisnotthewitness’
abilityto”sell”aparticularthesisbutratherthereasonablenessandcogency
ofthatthesisviewedinthelightofalltheevidencewhichleadstoa
favourableorunfavourablefindingofcredibility”.
WiththisrecentdecisionandtheMacNeildecisiononwhichitisbased,itnow
appearsthatinCanada,beforetheFederalCourt,nomotionforsummary
judgementcanbegrantedwhenanissueisraisedastothecredibilityofa
party’sevidence.AsHugessenJ.noted,thiswillhavetheeffectoflimitingthe
Court’sabilityingrantingamotionforsummaryjudgement,incaseswhereit
shouldbegranted,becauseof“credibility”issueswhichmightberaisedbya
partyfacingsuchmotion.

4

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