Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc. (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96

CourtFederal Court of Appeal (Canada)
Case DateMay 08, 2017
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations2017 FCA 96
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
42 practice notes
  • Alberta v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency, 2024 FC 292
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 22 Febrero 2024
    ...other things, be clear and unequivocal and must contain an element of compromise [see Venngo Inc v Concierge Connection Inc (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96 at para [293] Here, the Plaintiffs’ offer provided: 1. Subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, [Access Copyright] shall pay to the Plaintiffs t......
  • Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Canada Inc., 2021 FC 186
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 26 Febrero 2021
    ...B: Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma v Maple Leaf Meats Inc, 2002 FCA 417 at para 12 [Consorzio]; Venngo Inc v Concierge Connection Inc, 2017 FCA 96 at paras 85-86 [Venngo], leave to appeal ref’d [2017] SCCA No 302. Given that submissions in support of a lump sum award can significan......
  • Energizer Brands, LLC and Energizer Canada inc. v. Gillette Campany et al., 2023 FC 804
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 6 Julio 2023
    ...before me is distinguishable from that considered by the Federal Court of Appeal in Venngo Inc. v Concierge Connection Inc. (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96 [Venngo]. There, Justice Gleason found that the defendants/respondents did not offend section 22 when they used the words MEMBER PERKS INCLUD......
  • Pharmascience Inc. v. Teva Canada, 2022 FCA 207
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • 1 Diciembre 2022
    ...doing so because to qualify under that rule an element of compromise is required: Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc. (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96. This Court agreed that the element of compromise identified by the Tax Court did not qualify as such. However, the Tax Court had not relied s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
32 cases
  • Alberta v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency, 2024 FC 292
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 22 Febrero 2024
    ...other things, be clear and unequivocal and must contain an element of compromise [see Venngo Inc v Concierge Connection Inc (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96 at para [293] Here, the Plaintiffs’ offer provided: 1. Subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, [Access Copyright] shall pay to the Plaintiffs t......
  • Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Canada Inc., 2021 FC 186
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 26 Febrero 2021
    ...B: Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma v Maple Leaf Meats Inc, 2002 FCA 417 at para 12 [Consorzio]; Venngo Inc v Concierge Connection Inc, 2017 FCA 96 at paras 85-86 [Venngo], leave to appeal ref’d [2017] SCCA No 302. Given that submissions in support of a lump sum award can significan......
  • Energizer Brands, LLC and Energizer Canada inc. v. Gillette Campany et al., 2023 FC 804
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 6 Julio 2023
    ...before me is distinguishable from that considered by the Federal Court of Appeal in Venngo Inc. v Concierge Connection Inc. (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96 [Venngo]. There, Justice Gleason found that the defendants/respondents did not offend section 22 when they used the words MEMBER PERKS INCLUD......
  • Pharmascience Inc. v. Teva Canada, 2022 FCA 207
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • 1 Diciembre 2022
    ...doing so because to qualify under that rule an element of compromise is required: Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc. (Perkopolis), 2017 FCA 96. This Court agreed that the element of compromise identified by the Tax Court did not qualify as such. However, the Tax Court had not relied s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 firm's commentaries
  • The Top 10 Trademark Cases Of 2017
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 16 Enero 2018
    ...to constitute passing off as that step alone does not deliver a message to a consumer. Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc., 2017 FCA 96 In this case, the Federal Court of Appeal underscored the limitations in adopting generic or descriptive terms in one's trademark. The plaintiff, Venn......
  • Round Two of The 'Bunny Brand' Battle – Energizer Brands, LLC v The Gillette Company, 2020 FCA 49
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 9 Marzo 2020
    ...of subsection 22(1). The change in the law was recently confirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal: Venngo Inc v Concierge Connection Inc, 2017 FCA 96, per Gleason JA [Venngo]. In my respectful view, subsection 22(1) construed as required by Veuve Clicquot prohibits Duracell's use of the term......
  • Canadian Trade-Marks: Year In Review 2017
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 6 Abril 2018
    ...to its trade-mark infringement and passing-off claims. Section 22—Depreciation of Goodwill In Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc., 2017 FCA 96, leave to appeal refused 2017 CanLII 78708 (SCC), the Federal Court of Appeal heard an appeal from the Federal Court in an action brought by Ve......
  • Evidence Of Actual Confusion Is Not Determinative In Trademark Infringement Cases
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 7 Junio 2017
    ...not trump the other factors; it is just one factor to be weighed in the confusion analysis. Case Venngo Inc. v. Concierge Connection Inc., 2017 FCA 96 IP Venngo Inc. offers discount, benefit and incentive programs to Canadian companies and professional organizations. Its client organization......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT