Renaud Cointreau & CIE v. Cordon Bleu International Ltd., (2000) 193 F.T.R. 182 (TD)

• Judge: Tremblay-Lamer, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: June 05, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2000), 193 F.T.R. 182 (TD)

Renaud Cointreau v. Cordon Bleu Intl. (2000), 193 F.T.R. 182 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2000] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.010

Renaud Cointreau & CIE (appelante) v. Cordon Bleu International Ltd. (intimée)

(T-972-93)

Indexed As: Renaud Cointreau & CIE v. Cordon Bleu International Ltd.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Tremblay-Lamer, J.

June 16, 2000.

Summary:

At the appellant's request, the Registrar of Trademarks issued a notice pursuant to s. 45 of the Trade-marks Act requiring the respon­dent to show use of its registered trademark "Cordon Bleu". The respondent provided a representative sample showing use of the mark "Cordon Bleu" in association with the services mentioned in the registration. The Registrar upheld the registration. The appel­lant appealed.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Divi­sion, dismissed the appeal.

Trademarks, Names and Designs - Topic 7

Trademarks - General - Wares or services - What constitutes - [See first Trademarks, Names and Designs - Topic 889 ].

Trademarks, Names and Designs - Topic 889

Trademarks - Registration - Expungement of mark - Grounds - Lack of use or aban­donment - The respondent registered the trademark "Cordon Bleu" in respect of the following services "recipes, suggestions and other instructive matter printed on food product labels, said printed matter being applicable to the preparation, the cooking and or improvement of said food products" - At the appellant's request, the Registrar of Trademarks issued a notice pursuant to s. 45 of the Trade-marks Act requiring the respondent to show use of the trademark "Cordon Bleu" - The respondent provided a representative sample showing use of the mark "Cordon Bleu" in associ­ation with the services mentioned in the registration - The Registrar upheld the registration - The appellant appealed, arguing that the respondent was not pro­viding the services of offering recipes, suggestions and other instructive material since it was selling products, not providing services - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the appeal - The services could be incidental to the sale of products - The court also stated that the use of another trademark was not a bar to the use of the trademark "Cordon Bleu" in association with the same service.

Trademarks, Names and Designs - Topic 889

Trademarks - Registration - Expungement of mark - Grounds - Lack of use or aban­donment - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, stated that the summary procedure under s. 45 of the Trade-marks Act to remove a mark from the register for lack of use was not the proper means of challenging the validity of the registration itself - See paragraph 38.

Cases Noticed:

Plough (Canada) Ltd. v. Aerosol Fillers Inc., [1981] 1 F.C. 679; 34 N.R. 39 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22, footnote 5].

Meredith & Finlayson v. Registrar of Trademarks et al. (1991), 138 N.R. 379; 40 C.P.R.(3d) 409 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22, footnote 5].

Kraft Ltd. v. Registrar of Trademarks, [1984] 2 F.C. 874; 1 C.P.R.(3d) 457 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 26, footnote 8].

Hartco Enterprises Inc. v. Becterm Inc. (1989), 24 F.T.R. 69; 24 C.P.R.(3d) 223 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 26, footnote 9].

Country Skillet Restaurants Inc. v. A.C.A. Co-operative Association, [1990] C.O.M.C. No. 808, refd to. [para. 39, footnote 16].

Hôtel la Sapinière Ltée v. S. Coorsh & Sons Ltd. (1982), 73 C.P.R.(2d) 216 (T.M. Opp. Bd.), refd to. [para. 39, footnote 16].

British Petroleum Co. v. Bombardier Ltd. (1971), 4 C.P.R.(2d) 204 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 39, footnote 16].

Statutes Noticed:

Trade-marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13, sect. 45(1) [para. 21].

Counsel:

François Guay, for the appellant;

Barry Gamache, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Smart & Biggar, Montreal, Quebec, for the appellant;

Léger, Robic & Richard, Montreal, Que­bec, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 5, 2000, at Ottawa, Ontario, before Tremblay-Lamer, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Divi­sion, who delivered the following decision on June 16, 2000.