Earlier this month, the Federal Court issued its decision in Subway IP LLC v Budway, Cannabis & Wellness Store, 2021 FC 583, a case involving a cannabis retailer that knowingly adopted a parody mark in connection with its...more
There were several notable trademark cases in Canada in 2020, including those addressing comparative advertising, depreciation of goodwill, brand parody, trademark ‘use’ in the absence of a brick-and-mortar location, and...more
The Federal Court of Canada (the “FCTD“) recently released Toys “R” Us (Canada) Ltd v Herbs “R” Us Wellness Society, in which it considered whether a cannabis company, Herbs “R” Us Wellness Society (“Herbs R Us“), had...more
In a recent decision of Canada’s Federal Court illustrates the danger of adopting a mark or name “inspired” by a famous or well-known brand, even when confusion is unlikely. The decision is a cautionary tale, particularly for...more
While comparative advertising can be an effective tool for comparing and contrasting competing brands, there are limits on what claims can lawfully be made. One such limit is provided by Section 22 of the Trademarks Act,...more
Comparative advertising can be a useful tool for marketers. It positions competing brands against each other and helps consumers make better choices. However, there are legal limits to comparative advertising which are set...more
Earlier this month we published an exhaustive review of the life sciences and regulatory cases in the Canadian courts, and decisions on the merits for the year are summarized in our in our Rx IP Update 2018 Highlights in...more
Smart & Biggar prevails at trial on behalf of Diageo in trade dress case. On June 12, 2017, the Federal Court issued its 99-page decision in Diageo Canada Inc v Heaven Hill Distilleries Inc et al, 2017 FC 571. The Court...more