Chateau-Gai Wines Ltd v Institut National des Appellations d'Origine des Vins et Eaux-de-Vie et Al,
| Judge | Laskin J.,Pigeon J.,Re,Abbott,Judson,Laskin JJ.,Spence |
| Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
| Date | 02 April 1974 |
(Fauteux C.J.C., Abbott, Martland, Judson, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Laskin and Dickson JJ.)
Treaties — Conclusion and operation — Ratification — Entry into force — Treaty providing for ratification — Treaty also providing for operation from a date to be agreed by parties — Whether ratification essential for treaty to come into force — Effect of failure to ratify — Interpretation of treaties — Relevance of approach of Executive — Canada-France Trade Agreement Act 1933 — The law of Canada
States as international persons — In general — Sovereignty and independence — Conduct of foreign relations — Conclusiveness of the statements of the Executive — Statement of the Executive as to whether a treaty is in force — Effect of — Whether conclusive — The law of Canada
Summary: The facts:—Under Article 11 of the Canada-France Trade Agreement, 1933, each of the parties agreed to ensure respect for the appellations of origin of wine of the other which had been registered with its competent authorities. The appellation ‘Champagne’ was registered as a trademark in Canada. Article 16 of the Agreement provided that the Agreement would be ratified and the ratifications exchanged as soon as possible. It was also stipulated that the Agreement would come into force on a date jointly agreed. The Agreement was given effect in Canada by the Canada-France Trade Agreement Act 1933 which provided that the Agreement would have the force of law notwithstanding the provisions of any law in Canada. The respondents sued the appellant for an injunction restraining the appellant from using the mark ‘Champagne’ and for damages for wrongful user. The appellant contended, inter alia, that the Agreement was not in force as it had not been ratified. The Secretary of State for External Affairs provided a certificate stating that ratification had not taken place but that both countries had agreed on a date for the Agreement to come into force and had since regarded the Agreement as having come into force on 10 June 1933. The Court of Appeal of Quebec upheld a judgment of the Superior Court condemning the appellant to pay damages and enjoining it to refrain from using the appellation ‘Champagne’ at any time. The appellant appealed.
Held (By five votes to four):—The appeal was dismissed.
(1) Ratification was not essential for the Treaty to come into force. It was enough that the parties had jointly agreed upon a date from which they would regard the Treaty as being in force.
(2) In the interpretation of treaties the approach of the Government had great weight and in any case it was wholly within the domain of the Executive to state whether a treaty was in force or not.
(3) The Treaty was accordingly in force.
(4) The respondents were entitled to an injunction and damages. The injunction, however, would not take effect for three months and the damages would be reduced to $1,000 for each respondent other than the Institut.
The following is the text of the relevant part of the judgment of the Court.
Fauteux, C.J.C., concurs with Pigeon, J.
Abbott, J., concurs with Laskin, J.
Martland, J., concurs with Pigeon, J.
Judson, J., concurs with Laskin, J.
Ritchie, J., concurs with Pigeon, J.
Spence, J., concurs with Laskin, J.
Pigeon, J. (translation):—This appeal is against a decision of the Court of Appeal of Quebec, which with one dissent upheld a judgment of the Superior Court condemning appellant to pay damages in the amount of $75,000 and enjoining it to refrain from using the appellation ‘champagne’ at any time or in any place. This judgment was based on the Canada-France Trade Agreement Act, 1933, 1932–33 (Can.), c. 31, and the Treaty contained in a schedule thereto. The Act provides, inter alia:
1. This Act may be cited as The Canada-France Trade Agreement Act, 1933.
2. The Trade Agreement between Canada and France set out in the Schedule to this Act, is hereby approved, and shall have the force of law notwithstanding the provisions of any law in force in Canada.
4. The Governor in Council may, notwithstanding the provisions of any law in force in Canada, make such appointments, establish such offices, make such orders and regulations and do such acts and things as are deemed necessary to carry out the provisions and intent of the said Agreement.
5. This Act shall come into force on a day to be fixed by proclamation of the Governor in Council.
A proclamatiom fixing June 10, 1933, as the day the Act came into force was duly published. The relevant provisions of the Trade Agreement are the following:
Each of the High Contracting Parties agrees to protect within its territorial limits, the natural or manufactured products of the other Party against all forms of dishonest competition, particularly with regard to the use, for commerical purposes, of false indications relative to the place of origin, nature, kind or substantial qualities of goods.
Each of the High Contracting Parties agrees to insure within its territorial limits, respect for the appellations of origin of wine, agricultural or other products of the other Party, which shall have been registered by the latter with the competent services of the other Party.
There shall only be accepted for registration, under the conditions of the present Article, names which are recognized and protected as appellations of origin which have not become public property within the territory of the Party which gives notice thereof.
Appellations of origin shall be registered without charge by each of the High Contracting Parties with the competent services of the other Party.
Appellations of origin thus registered shall not, in any case, be used commercially for the purpose of describing goods other than those which have a definite right to such names.
This prohibition shall apply to every form of competition contrary to honest usages in industrial and commercial matters and of such a nature as to create a confusion with the products of a competitor.
The present Agreement shall be ratified and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Ottawa as soon as possible.
It shall come into force on the date which the High Contracting...
To continue reading
Request your trial