Survey Evidence Shows that the Word Nordiques Brings to Mind the Nordiques Hockey Team

S
URVEYEVIDENCESHOWSTHATTHEWORDNORDIQUES
BRINGSTOMINDTHENORDIQUESHOCKEYTEAM

CATHERINEBERGERON*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENTANDTRADEMARKAGENTS
Accessoiresd’AutosNordiquesInc.v.CanadianTireCorp.,2007FCA367
(FederalCourtofAppeal,RichardC.J.)
ThisisanappealofadecisionrenderedbyJusticeBlaisoftheFederalCourt
allowinganappealbytheRespondent,CanadianTireCorporation(hereinafter
“CanadianTire”orthe“Respondent”),undersection56oftheTrade-marksAct
(hereinafterthe“Act”).

1.TheRegistrar’sdecision
CanadianTirefiledanapplication,basedonproposeduse,toregisterthetrade-
markNORDIC&SnowflakeDesign(hereinafterthetrade-mark“NORDIC”)forusein
associationwithtires.Accessoiresd’AutosNordiquesInc.(hereinafter“Accessoires
d’Autos”orthe“Applicant”)opposedCanadianTire’sapplication,alleginga
likelihoodofconfusionwith,amongstothers,itspreviouslyregisteredandused
trade-markNORDIQUESinassociationwithautomobilepartsandaccessories.
Accessoiresd’AutoswassuccessfulbeforetheRegistrarasitwasfoundthat:(a)
CanadianTiredidnotprove,onabalanceofprobabilities,thatthereisnolikelihood
ofconfusionbetweenthetwotrade-markswhenusedinassociationwithautomobile
partsandaccessories;(b)bothtrade-markshaveacommonalityofideasbecause
bothsuggestthatthewaresaremeanttobeusedduringwinter;(c)theyare
phoneticallyidenticaltoamonolingualFrenchspeakingperson;(d)thereisoverlap
betweensomeofthewarescoveredbytheNORDIQUES’certificateofregistration
andthewareslistedintheNORDICapplication;(e)thenatureofbothparties’
businessissimilar;and(f)theNORDICtrade-markisnotdistinctivewithinthe
meaningofsection2oftheAct.



















































©CIPS,2007.*Lawyer,CatherineBergeronisamemberofLEGERROBICRICHARD,LLP,amultidisciplinaryfirm
oflawyers,andpatentandtrade-markagents.Publication293.048.

2
ItisworthnotingthattheRegistrarrefusedtoacceptCanadianTire’sargumentthat
thetrade-markNORDICevokedthenameofthedefunctNHLhockeyteam,Quebec
Nordiques,andnottheApplicant’strade-markNORDIQUESbecauseCanadianTire
failedtofileevidencesupportingsuchaconclusion.
2.TheFederalCourt’sdecision
CanadianTireappealedtheRegistrar’sdecisiontotheFederalCourtandfiled
additionalevidenceestablishingthatintheQuebecarea,wheretheApplicant’s
enterpriseislocated,thetrade-markNORDIQUESevokesimagesofthehockey
teamandnottheApplicant’strade-mark.
Inhisreviewofthelikelihoodofconfusionbetweenthemarksatissue,JusticeBlais
mainlyagreedwiththeconclusionsoftheRegistrar,butnotonthecriteriaof
subsection6(5)(e)oftheActashedeterminedthatthetrade-markswerevery
differentinappearance,evokeddifferentideasandthattherehadbeennoinstance
ofconfusion.Basedonthatreasoning,theRegistrar’sdecision,foundtobe
incorrect,wassetaside.
3.TheFederalCourtofAppeal’sdecision
TheFederalCourtofAppealfoundthatJusticeBlaisconductedtheappropriate
analysisoftheissueinreviewingtheRegistrar’sfindingonastandardof
correctness.Ontheissueofthestandardofreview,theFederalCourtofAppeal
wentbytheprinciplesofthedecisionMolsonBreweriesv.JohnLabattLtd.,[2000]3
F.C.145andwrotethat:
“WhennoadditionalevidenceisintroducedbeforetheFederalCourt,the
standardofreviewapplicabletotheRegistrar’sdecisionsoffact,lawor
discretionisreasonableness.Whensuchevidenceisintroduced,however,the
standardofreviewisdifferentasnotedbyJusticeRothstein:
However,whereadditionalevidenceisadducedintheTrialDivisionthat
wouldhavemateriallyaffectedtheRegistrar’sfindingsoffactorthe
exerciseofhisdiscretion,theTrialDivisionmustcometohisorherown
conclusionastothecorrectnessoftheRegistrar’sdecision(Molson
Breweries,para.51).”
1

TheadditionalevidencefiledbyCanadianTireshednewlightontheanalysisofthe
elementsofsubsection6(5)(e)oftheActpertainingtothedegreeofresemblance























































 

 









3
betweenthemarksatissue,andledthejudgetoconcludethattheRegistrar’s
applicationofsubsection6(5)(e)oftheActwasincorrect.AstheFederalCourtdid
notcommitanyreviewableerror,theappealwasdismissed.

4
ROBIC,ungroupedavocatsetdagentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommerce
vouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelle
danstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marques
decommerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsdorigine;droitsdauteur,
propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdelartisteinterprète;informatique,
logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentions
végétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchiseset
transfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;
marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérificationdiligente
etaudit.ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicated
since1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:
patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksand
indicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,
neighbouringrights;computer,softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,
pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,know-how,competitionandanti-
trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionand
businesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;
duediligence.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLULINVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDE
LAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOUR
IDEASTOTHEWORLD