Specialty Sports Ltd. v. Kimpex International Inc. et al., (1997) 128 F.T.R. 137 (TD)

• Judge: Lutfy, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: Wednesday February 19, 1997
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1997), 128 F.T.R. 137 (TD)

Specialty Sports Ltd. v. Kimpex Intl. (1997), 128 F.T.R. 137 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1997] F.T.R. TBEd. AP.012

Specialty Sports Limited (plaintiff) v. Kimpex International Inc., Kimpex Action Inc., and John Ramsay (defendants)

(T-2832-96)

Indexed As: Specialty Sports Ltd. v. Kimpex International Inc. et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Lutfy, J.

March 17, 1997.

Summary:

Specialty Sports brought a copyright and trademark infringement action against the defendants. Specialty Sports moved for an interlocutory injunction.

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

Injunctions - Topic 1610

Interlocutory or interim injunctions - General principles - Circumstances when injunction will not be granted - [See Injunctions - Topic 6307].

Injunctions - Topic 6307

Particular matters - Injury to trade - Improper use of trademarks, names or designs - Specialty sued the defendants, claiming that the defendants infringed its trademarks names and designs with respect to a rainsuit, motorcycle gloves and a jacket - Specialty applied for an interlocutory injunction - Specialty relied on s. 64(3) of the Copyright Act, a relatively new provision concerning the protection of copyright in artistic work used as a trademark or for material that has a woven or knitted pattern, etc. - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, declined to grant an interlocutory injunction - The court concluded that the interpretation of s. 64(3) provided a serious issue to be tried - However, the balance of convenience did not favour granting the injunction and the harm could be compensated in damages.

Injunctions - Topic 6311

Particular matters - Injury to trade - Copyright infringement - [See Injunctions - Topic 6307].

Cases Noticed:

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241; 111 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 54 C.P.R.(3d) 114, refd to. [para. 13].

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Manitoba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R.(2d) 241; 18 C.P.C.(2d) 273; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 25 Admin. L.R. 20; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 1, refd to. [para. 13].

Turbo Resources Ltd. v. Petro Canada Inc., [1989] 2 F.C. 451; 91 N.R. 341; 24 C.P.R.(3d) 1 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Bayliner Marine Corp. v. Doral Boats Ltd., [1986] 3 F.C. 421; 67 N.R. 139; 10 C.P.R.(3d) 289 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

U & R Tax Services Ltd. v. H & R Block Canada Inc. (1995), 97 F.T.R. 259; 62 C.P.R.(3d) 257 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Eli Lilly and Co. v. Novopharm Ltd. (1996), 69 C.P.R.(3d) 455 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Lumonics Research Ltd. v. Gould, Refac International Ltd. and Patlex Corp., [1983] 2 F.C. 360; 46 N.R. 483; 70 C.P.R.(2d) 11 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Wilson (Alex) Coldstream Ltd. v. Lapaco Paper Products Ltd. (1994), 74 F.T.R. 293; 55 C.P.R.(3d) 45 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Overseas Enterprises Ltd. et al. v. Feathers Publishing & Marketing Inc. et al. (1990), 41 F.T.R. 147; 34 C.P.R.(3d) 78 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Thinkway Toys v. Vicki Collections (1989), 28 C.P.R.(3d) 572 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Horn Abbot Ltd. v. Coulter (W.B.) Sales Ltd. (1984), 77 C.P.R.(2d) 145 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Duomo Inc. v. Giftcraft Ltd. (1984), 1 C.P.R.(3d) 165 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Syntex Inc. v. Novopharm Ltd. (1991), 126 N.R. 114; 36 C.P.R.(3d) 129 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1991] 3 S.C.R. xi; 137 N.R. 391, refd to. [para. 23].

Syntex Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (1991), 126 N.R. 122; 36 C.P.R.(3d) 139 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Nature Co. v. Sci-Tech Educational Inc. (1992), 141 N.R. 363; 41 C.P.R.(3d) 359 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Titan Linkabit Corp. et al. v. S.E.E. See Electronic Engineering Inc. et al. (1993), 62 F.T.R. 241; 48 C.P.R.(3d) 62 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Imperial Chemical Industries PLC v. Apotex Inc. (1989), 101 N.R. 147; 27 C.P.R.(3d) 345 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Centre Ice Ltd. v. National Hockey League et al. (1994), 166 N.R. 44; 53 C.P.R.(3d) 34 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Statutes Noticed:

Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, sect. 64(2), sect. 64(3) [para. 15].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates (1987 and 1988), pp. 7669, 7689-90, 7692, 12586-7, 15522 [para. 16].

Hansard, Canada - see Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates.

Counsel:

J. Guy Potvin, for the plaintiff;

Barbara A. McIsaac, Q.C., for the defendants.

Solicitors of Record:

Potvin Law Office, Ottawa, Ontario, for the plaintiff;

McCarthy Tétrault, Ottawa, Ontario, for the defendants.

This application was heard on February 19, 1997, at Ottawa, Ontario, before Lutfy, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on March 17, 1997.