Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20041130

Docket: A-136-04

Citation: 2004 FCA 404

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

NOËL J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             OAKLEY, INC. and

                                                        OAKLEY CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                          Appellants

                                                                           and

SHOPPERS DRUG MART INC.

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                      Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on November 30th, 2004.

                Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on November 30th, 2004.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                 MALONE J.A.


Date: 20041130

Docket: A-136-04

Citation: 2004 FCA 404

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

NOËL J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             OAKLEY, INC. and

                                                        OAKLEY CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                          Appellants

                                                                           and

SHOPPERS DRUG MART INC.

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                  (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on November 30th, 2004)

MALONE J.A.

[1]                The appellant has failed to identify any grounds upon which this Court could interfere with the exercise of discretion by O'Keefe J. in refusing to grant summary judgment and to refer the matter for trial.

[2]                The respondent should have its costs on appeal.


[3]                As the matter of costs before O'Keefe J. is the subject of a motion for reconsideration which remains under reserve, we decline to make any order in that regard.

                                                                                                                                         "B. Malone"                       

                                                                                                                                                      J.A.                            


                                                  FEDERAL COURT of APPEAL

                                     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

DOCKET:                                   A-136-04   

STYLE OF CAUSE:                  OAKLEY INC and OAKLEY CANADA INC

                                                                                                                              Appellants

and

SHOPPERS DRUG MART INC.                                    

                                                                                                                           Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:            TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:               NOVEMBER 30, 2004

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT:                      (ROTHSTEIN J.A., NOËL J.A., & MALONE J.A.)

DELIVERED FROM THE

BENCH BY:                               MALONE J.A.

APPEARANCES BY:              

Mr. Kenneth McKay

FOR THE APPELLANTS

                                                                   

Mr. Steven Garland

Mr. Kevin Graham                      FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Sim, Hughes, Ashton, McKay

Toronto, Ontario                          FOR THE APPELLANTS

Smart & Biggar

Ottawa, Ontario                           FOR THE RESPONDENT


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.