Trademark Decisions

Appeal dismissed: admissibility of hearsay found to be best left to the applications judge
Avon Products Inc. v. Moroccanoil Israel Ltd., 2013 FC 1137

Moroccanoil has appealed a Prothonotary’s decision to not strike 58 paragraphs from an affidavit filed by Avon, having previously argued the paragraphs are inadmissible hearsay. The appeal was dismissed.

Avon is seeking to expunge the trademark MOROCCANOIL for hair care products. Avon has alleged the mark was not registrable at the date of registration and it was not distinctive at the time that proceedings bringing into question its validity were commenced. Avon included hearsay statements from telephone calls as a part of its affidavit evidence.

The Prothonotary had concluded that the judge hearing the application on the merits would be the best person to determine whether the hearsay was admissible and to decide how much weight the statements should be afforded. The appellate Judge determined that the decision was not based upon a wrong principle or upon a misapprehension of the facts, and therefore declined to intervene.

Judicial Interim Release granted pending appeal of trademark and copyright infringements
R. v. Strowbridge, 2013 NLCA 57

Mr. Strowbridge successfully applied for Judicial Interim Release pending his appeal from multiple convictions, including a six-month consecutive prison term for copyright and trademark infringements. The Court noted that the usual disposition in similar cases is a fine with or without a conditional sentence, but not a prison term. The cases showed the conditional sentences average six months in length, but can go up to twelve months. Since no previous cases resulted in a prison term, Mr. Strowbridge was released pending appeal.

The underlying decision has not been reported so precise details on the infringements are not readily available.

Other Industry News

Health Canada has announced that effective immediately, it will begin releasing certain information about Investigational Testing or clinical trials involving the use of medical devices in patients.

CIPO has published examples of purposive construction analysis of medical use claims for statutory subject – matter evaluation that are said to be for training purposes

Authors

Chantal Saunders 
CSaunders@blg.com
613.369.4783

Beverley Moore 
BMoore@blg.com
613.369.4784

Adrian J. Howard 
AJHoward@blg.com
613.787.3557

Expertise

Intellectual Property
Trademarks