Shoe Company Walks Away From Contempt Show Cause Hearing

In Asics v 9153-2267 Quebec, Chief Justice Crampton of the Federal Court held that the Defendant in a trade-mark infringement case and its officers had shown cause why they should not be held in contempt of Court.

Both Asics and the Defendant sell shoes in Canada. In November 2013, Asics obtained a default judgment enjoining the Defendant and its officers from using or infringing certain marks and awarding damages.

In late 2016, Asics sought and obtained an order requiring the Defendant and its officers to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of Court regarding the default judgment. Asics alleged that the Defendant breached the default judgment by continuing to sell shoes bearing the Asics marks and by failing to pay the damages award.