T-Rex Property AB v. Pattison Outdoor Advertising Limited Partnership

T-Rex Property AB v. Pattison Outdoor Advertising Limited Partnership

The court found no reviewable error in the Case Management Judge’s exercise of discretion: the record supported bifurcation under the applicable factors, the Protective Order and OCEO scope were within the case management judge’s discretion and addressed live disputed submissions about access to sensitive material, and the award of costs payable forthwith was within the court’s discretion despite posted security for costs; accordingly the appeal was dismissed and costs to the defendants were fixed at $3000.

Citation
2019 FC 1004
Parties
Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: T-REX PROPERTY AB; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: PATTISON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: PATTISON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LTD.; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: JIM PATTISON INDUSTRIES LTD.; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: ONESTOP MEDIA GROUP INC.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement Appeal From Case Management Orders / Appeal From Prothonotary/case Management Judge Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Bifurcation, Protective Order, Confidentiality Order, Outside Counsel Eyes Only (oceo) Designations, Costs Payable Forthwith, Patent Validity and Infringement
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Procedural Law Confidentiality Law Costs Law Bifurcation Protective Order +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T-REX PROPERTY AB

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

PATTISON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

PATTISON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LTD.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

JIM PATTISON INDUSTRIES LTD.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

ONESTOP MEDIA GROUP INC.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement Appeal From Case Management Orders / Appeal From Prothonotary/case Management Judge Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Case Management Judge erred in granting bifurcation of liability and quantification issues
  2. 2 Whether the Case Management Judge erred by basing the Protective Order on an issue not before the Court (scope of OCEO and client communications)
  3. 3 Whether the Case Management Judge erred in ordering costs payable immediately despite security for costs being posted

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no reviewable error in the Case Management Judge’s exercise of discretion: the record supported bifurcation under the applicable factors, the Protective Order and OCEO scope were within the case management judge’s discretion and addressed live disputed submissions about access to sensitive material, and the award of costs payable forthwith was within the court’s discretion despite posted security for costs; accordingly the appeal was dismissed and costs to the defendants were fixed at $3000.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to the Defendants fixed in the amount of $3000 payable in any event of the cause