Date: 20040618
Docket: T-1376-03
Citation: 2004 FC 875
BETWEEN:
EVERLAST WORLD'S BOXING
HEADQUARTERS CORPORATION
Applicant
- and -
AMETHYST INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
PINARD J.:
[1] This is an application for an order setting aside the decision of the Trade-marks Opposition Board (the Board) dated June 4, 2003 rejecting the applicant's application for the trade-mark EVERLAST & Design, Canadian trade-mark application number 733,975 (the application) pursuant to paragraph 12(1)(d) and subsection 63(3) of the Trade-marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13 (the Act).
[2] On July 19, 1994 Everlast World's Boxing Headquarters Corporation (the applicant) filed its application to register the trade-mark EVERLAST & Design for use in Canada in association with men's personal body care products.
[3] On November 1st, 2002 summary cancellation proceedings were commenced against registered trade-mark 417,868 pursuant to section 45 of the Act. According to this procedure, the respondent was required to file evidence of use of registered trade-mark 417,868 in association with the registered wares during the three year period preceding the date of the section 45 notice of summary cancellation proceedings. In this case, the respondent was required to file evidence of the use of its trade-mark from November 1st, 1999 to November 1st, 2002. The respondent failed to file the above-mentioned evidence in response to the section 45 notice by the three month deadline of February 1st, 2003. Consequently, on March 19, 2003 the respondent was notified that registered trade-mark 417,868 would be expunged from the register pursuant to subsections 45(4) and (5) of the Act. The respondent had two months following the March 19, 2003 expungement decision to appeal the decision. Since the respondent failed to file any sort of appeal, registered trade-mark 417,868 was publicly recorded as expunged on June 19, 2003 pursuant to subsection 45(5) of the Act.
[4] The Board refused the applicant's application to register the proposed trade-mark EVERLAST & Design. Specifically, the Board rejected the applicant's application because it concluded that the applicant had failed to show that its proposed trade-mark EVERLAST & Design is not confusing with registered trade-mark 417,868. The Board reached its conclusion on the basis of the factors set out in paragraphs 6(5)(c), (d) and (e) of the Act.
[5] The applicant argues that the Board erred in reaching this decision because it failed to consider that registered trade-mark 417,868 was noted as expunged on May 19, 2003 pursuant to section 45 of the Act. Consequently, the applicant submits that at the time of the Board's decision, the registered trade-mark 417,868 was not valid and its conclusion of confusion is unfounded in the facts. No submissions have been filed by the respondent.
[6] The relevant provisions of the Act are the following:
6. (5) In determining whether trade-marks or trade-names are confusing, the court or the Registrar, as the case may be, shall have regard to all the surrounding circumstances [...]
6. (5) En décidant si des marques de commerce ou des noms commerciaux créent de la confusion, le tribunal ou le registraire, selon le cas, tient compte de toutes les circonstances de l'espèce, [...]
45. (1) The Registrar may at any time and, at the written request made after three years from the date of the registration of a trade-mark by any person who pays the prescribed fee shall, unless the Registrar sees good reason to the contrary, give notice to the registered owner of the trade-mark requiring the registered owner to furnish within three months an affidavit or a statutory declaration showing, with respect to each of the wares or services specified in the registration, whether the trade-mark was in use in Canada at any time during the three year period immediately preceding the date of the notice and, if not, the date when it was last so in use and the reason for the absence of such use since that date.
45. (1) Le registraire peut, et doit sur demande écrite présentée après trois années à compter de la date de l'enregistrement d'une marque de commerce, par une personne qui verse les droits prescrits, à moins qu'il ne voie une raison valable à l'effet contraire, donner au propriétaire inscrit un avis lui enjoignant de fournir, dans les trois mois, un affidavit ou une déclaration solennelle indiquant, à l'égard de chacune des marchandises ou de chacun des services que spécifie l'enregistrement, si la marque de commerce a été employée au Canada à un moment quelconque au cours des trois ans précédant la date de l'avis et, dans la négative, la date où elle a été ainsi employée en dernier lieu et la raison de son défaut d'emploi depuis cette date.
(2) The Registrar shall not receive any evidence other than the affidavit or statutory declaration, but may hear representations made by or on behalf of the registered owner of the trade-mark or by or on behalf of the person at whose request the notice was given.
(2) Le registraire ne peut recevoir aucune preuve autre que cet affidavit ou cette déclaration solennelle, mais il peut entendre des représentations faites par le propriétaire inscrit de la marque de commerce ou pour celui-ci ou par la personne à la demande de qui l'avis a été donné ou pour celle-ci.
(3) Where, by reason of the evidence furnished to the Registrar or the failure to furnish any evidence, it appears to the Registrar that a trade-mark, either with respect to all of the wares or services specified in the registration or with respect to any of those wares or services, was not used in Canada at any time during the three year period immediately preceding the date of the notice and that the absence of use has not been due to special circumstances that excuse the absence of use, the registration of the trade-mark is liable to be expunged or amended accordingly.
(3) Lorsqu'il apparaît au registraire, en raison de la preuve qui lui est fournie ou du défaut de fournir une telle preuve, que la marque de commerce, soit à l'égard de la totalité des marchandises ou services spécifiés dans l'enregistrement, soit à l'égard de l'une de ces marchandises ou de l'un de ces services, n'a été employée au Canada à aucun moment au cours des trois ans précédant la date de l'avis et que le défaut d'emploi n'a pas été attribuable à des circonstances spéciales qui le justifient, l'enregistrement de cette marque de commerce est susceptible de radiation ou de modification en conséquence.
(4) When the Registrar reaches a decision whether or not the registration of a trade-mark ought to be expunged or amended, he shall give notice of his decision with the reasons therefor to the registered owner of the trade-mark and to the person at whose request the notice referred to in subsection (1) was given.
(4) Lorsque le registraire décide ou non de radier ou de modifier l'enregistrement de la marque de commerce, il notifie sa décision, avec les motifs pertinents, au propriétaire inscrit de la marque de commerce et à la personne à la demande de qui l'avis visé au paragraphe (1) a été donné.
(5) The Registrar shall act in accordance with his decision if no appeal therefrom is taken within the time limited by this Act or, if an appeal is taken, shall act in accordance with the final judgment given in the appeal.
(5) Le registraire agit en conformité avec sa décision si aucun appel n'en est interjeté dans le délai prévu par la présente loi ou, si un appel est interjeté, il agit en conformité avec le jugement définitif rendu dans cet appel.
56. (1) An appeal lies to the Federal Court from any decision of the Registrar under this Act within two months from the date on which notice of the decision was dispatched by the Registrar or within such further time as the Court may allow, either before or after the expiration of the two months.
[...]
(5) On an appeal under subsection (1), evidence in addition to that adduced before the Registrar may be adduced and the Federal Court may exercise any discretion vested in the Registrar.
56. (1) Appel de toute décision rendue par le registraire, sous le régime de la présente loi, peut être interjeté à la Cour fédérale dans les deux mois qui suivent la date où le registraire a expédié l'avis de la décision ou dans tel délai supplémentaire accordé par le tribunal, soit avant, soit après l'expiration des deux mois.
[...]
(5) Lors de l'appel, il peut être apporté une preuve en plus de celle qui a été fournie devant le registraire, et le tribunal peut exercer toute discrétion dont le registraire est investi.
63. (3) The Registrar may, after consultation with the Minister, delegate to any person he deems qualified any of his powers, duties and functions under this Act, except the power to delegate under this subsection.
(4) Any decision under this Act of a person authorized to make the decision pursuant to subsection (3) may be appealed in the like manner and subject to the like conditions as a decision of the Registrar under this Act.
63. (3) Le registraire peut, après consultation avec le ministre, déléguer à toute personne qu'il estime compétente les pouvoirs et fonctions que lui confère la présente loi, sauf le pouvoir de déléguer prévu au présent paragraphe.
(4) Il peut être interjeté appel d'une décision rendue en vertu de la présente loi par une personne autorisée conformément au paragraphe (3) de la même façon et aux mêmes conditions que d'une décision du registraire rendue en vertu de la présente loi.
[7] The procedure set out in section 45 of the Act is a summary cancellation procedure designed to clear the register of trade-marks that have fallen into disuse and are, to some extent, dead (NTD Apparel Inc. v. Ryan (2003), 27 C.P.R. (4th) 73 (F.C.T.D.)). When such a procedure has been initiated, the onus is on the registered owner of the trade-mark to establish use (National Sea Products Ltd. v. Scott & Aylen (1988), 19 C.P.R. (3d) 481 at 486 (F.C.T.D.)) by providing evidence of use within the three year period immediately preceding the section 45 notice. Subsection 45(3) provides that where no satisfactory response is received the registration is liable to be expunged. However, in such cases, registration is only voidable and is not void until it has been pronounced to be void by the Registrar (Maple Leaf Mills Ltd.v. Quaker Oats Co. of Canada Ltd. (1984), 82 C.P.R. (2d) 118 (F.C.T.D.)).
[8] It is important to recognize that the effect of expungement of a registered trade-mark is that where the registered trade-mark has been expunged and there is no evidence of use, there can be no confusion (Borden, Inc. v. Hostess Food Products Ltd., [1990] 1 F.C. 570 (T.D.)).
[9] By reason of subsection 63(4) of the Act, subsection 56(5) applies to these proceedings. Accordingly, evidence in addition to that adduced before the Registrar could be adduced on an appeal and this Court may exercise any discretion vested in the Registrar.
[10] In this case, additional evidence to that adduced before the Registrar was adduced before this Court: (1) the Trade-marks Certificate of Authenticity dated January 14, 2004 indicating that registered trade-mark 417,868 was expunged on June 19, 2003 for a failure to show use, and (2) a further letter from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office dated June 19, 2003 informing the respondent that registered trade-mark 417,868 was expunged on that day. Those documents, given their dates, could obviously not be adduced before the Board.
[11] As it is now clear that as of the date of expungement of the registered trade-mark 417,868, namely June 19, 2003, there could be no confusion between the parties' marks in question, the Board's impugned decision must be set aside and the applicant's application to register the proposed trade-mark EVERLAST & Design, granted.
[12] Consequently, this application is granted. The Trade-marks Opposition Board's decision, dated June 4, 2003, rejecting the applicant's application for the trade-mark EVERLAST & Design, Canadian trade-mark application number 733,975 pursuant to paragraph 12(1)(d) and subsection 63(3) of the Act, is set aside. The matter is sent back to a differently constituted Trade-marks Opposition Board with instruction to grant the latter applicant's application to register the trade-mark EVERLAST & Design.
[13] As the respondent did not file a Respondent's Record nor any submissions in opposition to this application, there are no costs adjudicated.
JUDGE
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
June 18, 2004
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1376-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: EVERLAST WORLD'S BOXING HEADQUARTERS CORPORATION v. AMETHYST INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: June 9, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER: The Honourable Mr. Justice Pinard
DATED: June 18, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Allen D. Israel FOR THE APPLICANT
No one appeared FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Lapointe Rosenstein FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Email this Content