Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 DECEMBER 2005

IP Year In Review – Trade-marks

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

2005 has been an active year for trade-mark law in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada has weighed in on the doctrine of functionality, the Federal Court has held that reverse confusion can be the basis for a cause of action, and courts have clarified issues with respect to official marks and trade-mark infringement generally.

CanadaIntellectual Property

Article by Pauline Wong, ©2005 Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

This article was originally published in Blakes Bulletin on Intellectual Property, December 2005.

2005 has been an active year for trade-mark law in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada has weighed in on the doctrine of functionality, the Federal Court has held that reverse confusion can be the basis for a cause of action, and courts have clarified issues with respect to official marks and trade-mark infringement generally.

Recent decisions have also led to changes in the practice in the Trade-marks Office with respect to descriptive or misdescriptive marks, and the priority of co-pending applications. Still to come is the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision relating to famous marks in two cases that were heard together: Veuve Clicquot and Mattel.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from