Illva Saronno S.p.A. v. Privilegiata fabbrica maraschino Excelsior Girolamo Luxardo S.p.A. et al., (1998) 157 F.T.R. 217 (TD)

• Judge: Evans, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: October 05, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1998), 157 F.T.R. 217 (TD)

Illva Saronno v. Privilegiata fabbrica (1998), 157 F.T.R. 217 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.024

Illva Saronno S.p.A. (plaintiff) v. Privilegiata fabbrica maraschino "Excelsior" Girolamo Luxardo S.p.A., Girolamo Luxardo Maraschino Canada Ltd., Saverio Schiralli Agencies Limited and Vanrick Corporation Limited (defendants)

(T-1604-95)

Indexed As: Illva Saronno S.p.A. v. Privilegiata fabbrica maraschino Excelsior Girolamo Luxardo S.p.A. et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Evans, J.

October 19, 1998.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued the defendants for trade­mark infringement. The defendants moved for a reference respecting quantum of dam­ages and profits including issues of appor­tionment.

An Associate Senior Prothonotary of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a decision reported 155 F.T.R. 319, denied the motion, where the defendants had not estab­lished that the order sought would necessar­ily result in a saving of time and expense. The defendants appealed.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Divi­sion, dismissed the appeal while holding that the test applied below was too stringent. The applicable test was whether the order sought would, on a balance of probabilities, result in a saving of time and expense.

Practice - Topic 3769

References and inquiries - When available - To determine damages - [See Practice - Topic 5204 ].

Practice - Topic 5204

Trials - General - Severance of issues or parties - General - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held: "On a motion under rule 107, the court may order the postponement of discovery and the deter­mination of remedial issues until after discovery and trial of the question of lia­bility, if the court is satisfied on the bal­ance of probabilities that in the light of the evidence and all the circumstances of the case (including the nature of the claim, the conduct of the litigation, the issues and the remedies sought), severance is more likely than not to result in the just, expedi­tious and least expensive determination of the proceeding on its merits" - Applying this test, the court then affirmed the dis­missal of the defendants' motion for a reference respecting quantum of damages and profits including issues of apportion­ment.

Cases Noticed:

Visx Inc. v. Nidek Co. et al. (1998), 150 F.T.R. 92 (T.D.), consd. [para. 6].

Canada v. Aqua-Gem Investments Ltd., [1993] 2 F.C. 425; 149 N.R. 273 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

Depuy (Canada) Ltd. et al. v. Joint Medi­cal Products Corp. et al. (1996), 67 C.P.R.(3d) 145 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Brouwer Turf Equipment Ltd. v. A and M Sod Supply Ltd., [1977] 1 F.C. 51; 13 N.R. 83 (F.C.A.), consd. [para. 11].

Pan-American Autolease & Rental Ltd. v. R., [1985] 1 F.C. 638 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Federal Court Rules (1998), rule 107 [para. 8].

Counsel:

B. Edmonds, for the plaintiff;

Newton Wong, for the defendants.

Solicitors of Record:

McCarthy Tétrault, Toronto, Ontario, for the plaintiff;

Newton Wong & Associates, Toronto, Ontario, for the defendants.

This appeal was heard at Toronto, Ontario, on October 5, 1998, by Evans, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 19, 1998.