Whisky Trade-Mark no longer “on the rocks” : Federal Court of appeal rules glen breton is registrable

2009-01-01

W
HISKYTRADE-MARKNOLONGER“ONTHEROCKS”:FEDERALCOURTOF
APPEALRULESGLENBRETONISREGISTRABLE

STELLASYRIANOS*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENT&TRADEMARKAGENTS
Inaveryrecentdecision,theFederalCourtofAppealoverturnedalowercourtruling
thatheldthetrade-markGLENBRETONwasnotregistrableinassociationwith
single-maltwhiskymadeinCanada,astheword“glen”hadbecomerecognizedin
Canadaasdesignatingtheplaceoforiginofwhisky(Scotland)[GlenoraDistillers
InternationalLtd.v.TheScotchWhiskyAssociationFCA16(DocketA-194-08-06)
January22
nd,2009].
TheFacts
In1990,theAppellantGlenoraDistillersInternationalLtd.(“Glenora”),situatedin
CapeBreton,NovaScotia,begandistillingasinglemaltwhiskyclaimingituseda
traditionalScottishmethodwhichgaveitsproductthetaste,characterandaromaofa
Scotchwhisky.Insofaras“Scotchwhisky”isaprotectedgeographicaldesignation
pursuanttoSection11.12oftheTrade-marksActtobeusedonlyinassociationwith
whiskiesproducedinScotland,Glenoraisprohibitedfromnamingitswhisky
“Scotch”.CanadianfoodanddrugregulationsalsoprohibitGlenorafromreferringto
itsproductas“Canadianwhisky”becauseitlacksthetaste,characterandaroma
associatedwithCanadianwhiskies.Consequently,Glenorareferstoitsproductasa
“singlemaltwhisky”.
In2000,Glenoraappliedfortheregistrationofthetrade-markGLENBRETONin
associationwithitssinglemaltwhisky.TheScotchWhiskyAssociation
(“Association”)opposedtheapplicationclaiminganassociationbetweentheword
“glen”andwhiskiesdistilledinScotlandasaresultoftheuseof“glen”prefixedmarks
inassociationwithseveralwell-knownsinglemaltScotchessuchasGlenlivet,
GlenmorangieandGlenfiddich(brandstheAssociationrepresents).Thisalleged
associationpremisedtheAssociation’sgroundofoppositionpursuanttoSection10
oftheTrade-marksAct,aprovisionwhichprohibitstradersfromadoptingastrade-

*Lawyer,StellaSyrianosisamemberofLEGERROBICRICHARD,L.L.P.,amultidisciplinaryfirmof
lawyers,andpatentandtrademarkagents.PublishedintheMarch2009issueofWorldIntellectual
PropertyReport.Publication142.221.

2
marks,marksthathavebyordinaryandbonafidecommercialusagebecome
recognizedinCanadaasdesignatingthekind,quality,quantity,destination,value,
placeoforiginordateofproductionofanywaresorservices.
TheAssociationwasunsuccessfulbeforetheTrade-marksOppositionBoardwhich
ruledthattheuseof“glen”prefixedmarksbyScotchwhiskydistillerswasnot
widespreadtothepointwhereCanadianconsumerswouldassociatetheword“glen”
onlywithScotchwhiskiesorwhiskiesoriginatinginScotland.Asaresult,theBoard
heldthattheterm“glen”hadnotbecomerecognizedthrough“ordinaryandbonafide
commercialuse”asdesignatingthegeographicoriginofwhiskyandwastherefore
notaprohibitedmarkunderSection10oftheTrade-marksAct.
FederalCourtdecision
Onappeal,bothpartiesadducedadditionalevidence.TheAssociationfiledwhatthe
FederalCourtconsideredtobesignificantnewevidenceontheissueofconfusionin
theCanadianmarketplace.
ContrarytotheBoard’sfindings,theFederalCourtopinedtherewasamore
extensivereputationassociatedwith“glen”prefixedScotchwhiskybrandsandtook
intoconsiderationthatsaidprefixhadnotbeenusedinCanadainrecentmemoryin
associationwithawhiskythatwasnotaScotchwhisky.
Ontheissueofactualmarketplaceconfusion,theFederalCourtfoundthatsome
consumerswerenotawarethatGlenora’sproductwasnotaScotchdistilledin
Scotland.ItsfindingwasbasedonevidencewhichestablishedthatGlenora’swhisky
hadbeenlistedinseveralbarandrestaurantlistsundertheheading“Scotch”evenif
occasionallywithanoteattemptingtoclarifyitwasCanadianinorigin.TheFederal
Courtalsoconsideredevidencebeforeitthatsimilarmistakeshadbeenmadebya
fewindependentcriticsandreviewers.
TheCourtrejectedGlenora’sargumentthatsuchconfusionwasduetoitsproduct
possessingmanyofthecharacteristicsofaScotchsuchasflavourandaroma.
Instead,theFederalCourtruledthatthisconfusionwasduetotheuseofthe“glen”
prefixedmarksandthattheword“glen”hadbyordinaryandbonafidecommercial
usebecomerecognizedinCanadaasdesignatingScotchwhisky.TheCourt
thereforedirectedtheRegistrarofTrade-markstorejectGlenora’sapplicationforthe
registrationofthemarkGLENBRETON.
FederalCourtofAppealdecision
Initsanalysis,theFederalCourtofAppeal(“FCA”)heldthattheFederalCourtmade
anerroroflawbecauseithadfailedtoconsiderwhethertheword“glen”asapartof

3
variousotherregisteredtrade-markswasinfacta“mark”withinthemeaningof
Section10oftheTrade-marksAct.TheFCAunderlinedtherewasnoexpressfinding
that“glen”wasamarkandnoevidencehadbeenadducedinsupportofsucha
conclusion.Instead,theevidencedemonstratedthattheword“glen”hadbeenused
asaprefixformanytrade-marksassociatedwithScotchwhiskyaswellasforother
productsandservicesunrelatedtotheliquorandbeverageindustry.
TheFCArejectedtheAssociation’sargumentthattheterm“glen”canbeconsidered
onitsownasa“mark”forthepurposesofSection10oftheTrade-marksActby
statingtheCourtwasnotmadeawareofanyauthorityforthepropositionthata
segmentofatrademarkcanstandaloneasamark;permittingsuchanargument
wouldruncontrarytonumerousauthoritiesstatingthattrade-marksshouldgenerally
notbedissected.
Basedonthisguideline,theFCAruleditwouldbeimpropertosegmentthe
previouslyregisteredmarkstoconsider“glen”asamarkonitsownasitwouldbe
affordingstrongertradeprotectiontothiswordthatisdue.TheFCAalsoasserted
thattheAssociation’ssuccessonappealwouldjeopardizethetrade-marksofits
memberswhowerealreadyusingtheirown“glen”prefixedmarksinassociationwith
Scotchwhiskies.
TheFCA,havingfoundinfavourofGlenora,directedtheRegistrartoallowits
applicationfortheregistrationoftheGLENBRETONtrade-mark.
Conclusion
ThiscasemaybeheraldedasanimportantwinforCanadianwhiskydistillersevenif
itturnedontheCourt’sfindingthattrade-marksshouldgenerallynotbedissectedbut
ratheranalysedasawhole,insteadofafindingontheassociationbetweentheterm
“glen”andScotchwhisky.TheCourt’srulinghasperhapsshedsomelightonthe
prohibitionanalysisunderSection10oftheTrade-marksActorattheveryleast
servesasareminderthatthetotalityofatrade-markmustbeconsideredinthe
Section10analysis.Asfortheproductsatissueinthiscase,regardlessoftheir
origin,onecanonlyspeculateifthelawyersrepresentingeachpartyeithercelebrated
orconsoledthemselveswithaglassofwhisky…

4
ROBIC,ungrouped©avocatsetd©agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommerce
vouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledans
touslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesde
commerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsd©origine;droitsd©auteur,
propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdel©artisteinterprète;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
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;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOUR
IDEASTOTHEWORLD
Trade-marksofLEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP(“ROBIC”)