Trudel v. Clairol Inc. of Canada

Trudel v. Clairol Inc. of Canada

Appellant, having knowingly sold product packaged for professional use contrary to respondent's distribution undertakings and thereby favoured breaches by distributors, was liable in delict and an injunction prohibiting continued retail sale of the professional‑packaged product was properly granted; no record evidence showed the distribution scheme was illegal under competition statutes so the private‑law restraints stood and injunctive relief was within the court’s discretion.

Citation
[1975] 2 SCR 236
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Paul Trudel; Plaintiff/respondent: Clairol Inc. of Canada
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 May 1974
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Injunction Arising From Sale/distribution of Goods (product Distribution, Tort and Contract Issues) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Queen's Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side); Judgment of Superior Court Affirmed Below
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Injunction, Resale Restrictions and Distribution Agreements, Inducing Breach of Contract/third‑party Liability, Manufacturer's Duty and Consumer Safety Warnings, Goodwill and Trademark Depreciation, Copyright as Basis for Controlling Ancillary Materials
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Tort (delict) Competition Law Intellectual Property Injunction Resale Restrictions and Distribution Agreements Inducing Breach of Contract/third‑party Liability +3 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Trudel

Defendant/appellant

Clairol Inc. of Canada

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Injunction Arising From Sale/distribution of Goods (product Distribution, Tort and Contract Issues) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Queen's Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side); Judgment of Superior Court Affirmed Below

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant was civilly liable for inducing or participating in breaches of distributors' undertakings (delict)
  2. 2 Whether respondent was entitled to an injunction prohibiting retail sale of product packaged for professional use
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's two‑tier distribution scheme violated competition law or was otherwise void

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant, having knowingly sold product packaged for professional use contrary to respondent's distribution undertakings and thereby favoured breaches by distributors, was liable in delict and an injunction prohibiting continued retail sale of the professional‑packaged product was properly granted; no record evidence showed the distribution scheme was illegal under competition statutes so the private‑law restraints stood and injunctive relief was within the court’s discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Injunction prohibiting appellant from selling to the public the product packaged and intended for professional use