Judicial Review and Official Marks



JUDICIALREVIEWANDOFFICIALMARKS

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

FileNETCorp.v.Canada(RegistrarofTrade-marks),2002FCA418(Federal
CourtofAppeal;coramSharlow,LindenandSexton,J.A.)
OnOctober29,2002,theFederalCourtofAppealupheldthetrialjudge’s
decisiondismissinganapplicationforjudicialreviewofthedecisionofthe
RegistrarofTrade-marks(hereinafter“Registrar”)toacceptforpublication
andtopublishnotice[pursuanttosubparagraph9(1)(n)(iii)oftheTrade-
marksAct,R.S.C.,1985,c.T-13,“theAct”]oftheCrown’sadoptionanduse
ofthemark“Netfile&design”(hereinafter“Netfile”)asanofficialmark.
Facts
FileNetCorporation(hereinafter“Applicant”)isthelicenseeofFileNet
CanadaInc.,ownerofthetrade-mark“Filenet”since1989,forusein
associationwith“computerhardware,softwareandperipherals;automated
officesystemsforthestorage,retrieval,handlingandprocessingofbusiness
documents”.InMay1999,CanadaCustomsandRevenueAgency
(hereinafter“Respondent”)chosethename“Netfile”(and“Impônet”in
French)foranewprogrampermittingthefilingofindividualtaxreturns
throughtheInternet.
OnAugust30,1999,theRespondentsubmittedarequesttotheRegistrarthat
publicnoticebegivenofthemark“Netfile”pursuanttosubparagraph
9(1)(n)(iii)oftheAct,whichmarkhadbeenfirstvisibleontheRespondent’s
Websitethenextday,i.e.August31,1999.OnDecember29,1999,the
Registrargavepublicnoticeofthe“Netfile”officialmark.



















































©LEGERROBICRICHARD,2002.*OfthelawfirmLEGERROBICRICHARD,g.p.andofthepatentandtrademarkagencyfirm
ROBIC,g.p.PublishedintheWorldTrademarkLawReporter.Publication293.002.



FederalCourt,TrialDivision
Fourissueswerebeforethetrialjudge:(1)Shouldthisproceedingbebrought
asanappealorajudicialreview?(2)IstheApplicantdirectlyaffectedby
theadoptionoftheofficialmarksotohavethestandingtobringthisjudicial
reviewapplication?(3)Isthevalidityofanoticegivenundersubparagraph
9(1)(n)(iii)dependentupontheadoptionoruseofthemarkinquestionby
thepublicauthority?(4)Ifso,atwhatpointintimemusttheadoptionand
usehaveoccurred?HadtheRespondentadoptedandusedthe“Netfile”
markbythattime?
Thetrialjudgeruledthesefourissuesasfollows:
(1)InlightofthedecisionMapleLeafMeatsInc.v.ConsorzioDelProsciuttoDi
Parma[(2000),9C.P.R.(4
th)485(F.C.T.D.;O’KeefeJ.)],thepresent
proceedingshouldbebroughtbeforetheCourtasajudicialreviewpursuant
tosection18.1oftheFederalCourtAct[R.S.C.,1985,c.F-7].Inordertohave
standingtopursueanappealundersubsection56(1)oftheAct,the
appellanthastobeapartytotheproceedingsbeforetheRegistrar;inthe
presentcase,theApplicantwasnotapartytothematterbeforethe
Registrar.

(2)DespitetheRespondent’sargumenttotheeffectthattheissuancebythe
Registrarofanoticeofuseandadoptiondoesnotaffectthirdparties’rights
inrespectofpre-existinguseofamark,theApplicanthasshownthatitis
directlyaffectedbytheadoptionoftheofficialmarkbytheRespondentand
thatithasstandingtobringthepresentjudicialreviewapplication.The
Applicant’sfuturedifficultytoexpandbecauseoftheadoptionoftheofficial
markandthepossibleconfusionbetweentheofficialmarkandthe
Applicant’smarkcouldaffecttheApplicant.
(3)Adoptionanduseofanofficialmarkbyapublicauthorityarecrucial
elementswithrespecttoits“validity”.Therefore,iftheRegistrarismisleadon
issuesrelatedtothenotionsofadoptionanduse,thentheofficialmarkis
“invalid”andcanbedeclaredineffectivetogiverisetoanyrights,
protectionorprohibitions.
(4)TheRespondenthadtoshowthatitadoptedandusedtheofficialmarkin
CanadabeforetheRegistrar’snoticeofthemark’sadoptionanduseon
December29,1999.TheRespondentsuccessfullymetitsburden;evenifthe
servicescouldonlybeprovidedafterpublicnoticeoftheadoptionanduse,



themarkwassufficientlyadvertisedandaccessedontheRespondent’sWeb
sitepriortothedateofnotice.
FederalCourtofAppeal

Withrespecttoissuesoneandtwo,J.SharlowconfirmedthattheRegistrar’s
decisioncouldnotbeappealedbytheApplicantundersection56ofthe
Act,butthattheApplicanthadthestatustochallengethesection9notice
bywayofajudicialreviewapplication.
TheCourtofAppealalsostatedthestatutorycriteriatobemetbyany
applicantrequestingapublicnoticeofadoptionanduseofamark:the
applicantmustbeapublicauthorityanditmustadoptandusetheofficial
mark.Ifthethesecriteriaaremet,theRegistrarhasnodiscretiontorefusea
requestundersection9togivepublicnoticeoftheadoptionanduseofan
officialmark.Incaseofjudicialreview,theapplicantthatrequestedthe
publicnoticehastheburdenofprovingthattheofficialmarkwasadopted
andusedbythedateofthepublicnotice.Onthatpoint,theFederalCourt
ofAppealconcurredwiththetrialjudgeandstatedthattheuse,consisting
ofadvertisingthemarkontheRespondent’sWebsite,wasasufficientuse.
Thejudgefinallycommentsontheissueofadoption.Inhisview,thequestion
ofadoptionofanofficialmarkisaquestionoffactwhichshouldnotbe
assessedinthelightofformaldocumentsconstitutingevidenceofa“formal”
adoption;theadoptionissufficientlyproved,unlesscogentreasonstothe
contrary,bythesolerequesttotheRegistrartogivepublicnotice.
Itiscertainlytobenotedhowthequestionofusewasevadedbyboththe
trialandappealdivisions.Thetrialjudgeseemstoapplythedefinitionof
“use”providedbytheActtotrade-marksonly,withoutany“necessary
applicationtoofficialmarks”.Onitspart,theFederalCourtofAppealdoes
notaddresstheissueatallbutstillconcludesthattheRespondent
establishedsufficientuseeventhoughtaxreturnscouldnotbefileduntil
January2000,inotherwords,eventhoughtheservicescouldnothavebeen
performedatthedateofpublicnotice.Thesedecisionscouldbeinterpreted
astoconfirmthatuseofanofficialmarkisnottobeestablishedinastricly
“trade-marksense”,butinamuchbroadersense.



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



ROBIC,ungroupedavocatsetdagentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevouédepuis1892àlaprotectionet
àlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;
marquesdecommerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsdorigine;droitsdauteur,propriétélittéraireet
artistique,droitsvoisinsetdelartisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,
pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchiseset
transfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;
poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérificationdiligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaquailleursdanslemonde.Lamaîtrise
desintangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892totheprotectionandthe
valorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certification
marksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;
computer,softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionand
businesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;duediligence;inCanadaand
throughouttheworld.Ideaslivehere.