Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20050112

Docket: A-199-04

Citation: 2005 FCA 13

CORAM:        LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

NOËL J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                 MATTEL, INC.

                                                                                                                                            Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                          3894207 CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                         Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on January 12, 2005

                  Judgment delivered from the Bench at Montréal, Quebec, on January 12, 2005.

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


Date: 20050112

Docket: A-199-04

Citation: 2005 FCA 13

CORAM:        LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

NOËL J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                 MATTEL, INC.

                                                                                                                                            Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                          3894207 CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                    (Delivered from the Bench at Montréal, Quebec, on January 12, 2005)

NOËL J.A.

[1]                This appeal rests on the appellant's contention that he Trial Judge erred in giving little or no probative value to the survey which it produced. Notwithstanding Mr. Hitchcock's able argument, we are of the view that the Trial Judge committed no error in treating the survey as he did.


[2]                In particular, it is apparent that the questions as framed, both in English and French, can at best, establish a possibility of confusion, a threshold which falls short of the recognized statutory standard of "reasonable likelihood of confusion" which must be established pursuant to paragraph 6(2) of the Trade-marks Act. This was in itself sufficient ground for the Trial Judge's decision to attribute little or no weight to the survey.

[3]                The appeal will be dismissed with costs.

                                                                                                                                      "Marc Noël"              

                                                                                                                                                      J.A.


                                                  FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                            NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          A-199-04

STYLE OF CAUSE:

MATTEL, INC.

                                                                                                                                            Appellant

and

                                                          3894207 CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                         Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                                                           January 12, 2005

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:              (Létourneau, Noël, Pelletier, JJ.A.)

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                             Noël J.A.

APPEARANCES:

Dan Hitchcock

FOR THE APPELLANT

Sophie Picard

FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Riches, McKenzie & Herbert LLP

Toronto, Ontario

FOR THE APPELLANT

Desjardins Ducharme Stein

Montréal, Quebec

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.