1 August 2012Jurisdiction reportsAshley Dumouchel

Inequitable errors by the trademarks office: quashing a trademark registration

The statement had been filed with the registrar prior to the expiry of the advertisement period, but had not been considered by it (London Life Insurance Company v Registrar of Trademarks and Debt Freedom Canada Inc).

In Canada, the Registrar of Trade-marks has a legal duty to consider a Statement of Opposition filed against an advertised application. This duty consists of either allowing an opposition to proceed where the statement raises a substantial issue for decision, or rejecting the opposition where it does not.

In this case, a Statement of Opposition had been filed against an advertised trademark application, but despite the registrar not having rejected the opposition, the mark proceeded to registration. Upon learning of the registration of the mark, the potential opponent commenced an application for judicial review in respect of the registrar’s (i) inadvertent failure to exercise its duty to act fairly; and (ii) actions outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant in this judicial review and the owner of the registered trademark both agreed that the circumstances warranted an order granting the relief sought, namely, the quashing of the registration and the return of the matter to the registrar to carry out its duty to consider the Statement of Opposition.

While the order quashing the registration was issued upon the consent of the trademark registrant, it nevertheless indicates the court’s acceptance of the reasoning within the written representations that were presented to it by the applicant seeking the relief. In particular, where a Statement of Opposition has been filed in respect of an advertised application, it is not open to the registrar to allow the trademark unless the opposition has been deemed to be frivolous, or the opposition has been decided in favour of the trademark applicant.

In Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v Canada (Register of Trade-marks), an earlier case before the Federal Court of Appeal, a potential opponent requested an extension of time to file a Statement of Opposition, and while the request was received by the registrar, the request was not considered and the mark registered.

“THE APPLICANT IN THIS JUDICIAL REVIEW AND THE OWNER OF THE TRADEMARK BOTH AGREED THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANTED AN ORDER GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT, NAMELY, THE QUASHING OF THE REGISTRATION.”

However, the current case is distinguishable in that a provision of the Canadian Trade-marks Act provides that in such a situation, the registrar may withdraw the application from allowance at any time before registration if it has failed to consider a request for an extension of time to file a Statement of Opposition. In this case, there was no statutory remedy available for the potential opponent to take advantage of.

The request for relief in this case was therefore founded upon the fact that no adequate alternative remedy was open to the potential opponent, other than the quashing of the registration and mandatory consideration of the Statement of Opposition by the registrar, thereby putting the potential opponent in the position it would have been in but for the failure of the registrar to carry out its duty.

It was open to the potential opponent instead to seek the expungement of the registered trademark, but such proceedings must be brought in the Federal Court, as opposed to before the registrar, and place heavier burdens on the party seeking to expunge the mark than would be on an opponent of an unregistered trademark.

If the applicant is successful in registering its mark, it may have a right of action against the registrar, in respect of any interim infringements that may have occurred in the period after any opposition should have been concluded.

While the precedential value of this case is difficult to gauge, it is important to note that where an error—which results in an opponent, through no fault of its own, not being allowed to pursue its opposition—is made by the registrar, there is hope that the court will exercise its equitable jurisdiction, quash the registration, and send the matter back so that the application and opposition will take their normal course.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk