Intuit Inc. v. Quicklaw Inc., 2003 FCA 230

Date: 20030515

Docket: A-388-02

Citation: 2003 FCA 230

CORAM:        STONE J.A.

EVANS J.A.

SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

INTUIT INC.

Applicant

- and -

QUICKLAW INC.

Respondent

                                              Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 15, 2003.

                       Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 15, 2003.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:                                                               EVANS J.A.

Date: 20030515

Docket: A-388-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 230

CORAM:        STONE J.A.

EVANS J.A.

SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

INTUIT INC.

Applicant

- and -

QUICKLAW INC.

Respondent

                                       REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on May 15, 2003)

EVANS J.A.

[1]                 We are not persuaded that the Applications Judge committed any error in dismissing the appeal by Intuit Inc. against the Registrar's rejection of Intuit's opposition to the registration of Quicklaw Inc.'s trade-mark, QUICKTAX. Her decision is reported as Intuit Inc. v. Quicklaw Inc., 2002 FCT 633.

[2]                 In our opinion, the Registrar's finding on the distinctiveness of the respondent's trade-mark was essentially factual in nature, or at best, a question of mixed fact and law. And, since the distinctiveness of a mark is a question within the expertise of the Registrar, the standard of review is reasonableness: Molson Breweries v. John Labatt Ltd., [2000] 3 F.C. 145 at para. 51 (C.A.).

[3]                 In our opinion it was reasonably open to the Registrar on the material before him to conclude as he did. We do not accept counsel's submission that in stating, "the opponent's task to negate the distinctiveness of a newcomer to the applicant's family of marks is somewhat more difficult than in the ordinary case", the Registrar was purporting to change the law relating to the onus of proof on a trade-mark application by virtue of the existence of a family of marks.

[4]                 For these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.

"John M. Evans"                

                                                                                                                                                                  J.A.                             

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                             APPEAL DIVISION

             Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

DOCKET:                                              A-388-02   

STYLE OF CAUSE:              INTUIT INC.

Applicant

- and -                                                                 

QUICKLAW INC.

Respondent

DATE OF HEARING:       MAY 15, 2003

PLACE OF HEARING:            TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT BY:       EVANS J.A.

DATED:                         MAY 15, 2003

APPEARANCES BY:        Ms. Andrea Rush

For the Applicant

Mr. Gordon J. Zimmerman and

Mr. Jason J. Hannibal

For the Respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:Heenan Blaikie LLP

Toronto, Ontario

For the Applicant

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Toronto, Ontario

For the Respondent