Supertek Canada Inc. v. Gatien

Supertek Canada Inc. v. Gatien

Although there may be a serious issue to be tried, plaintiffs failed to establish irreparable harm and produced no evidence of consumer confusion or loss of goodwill; accordingly the balance of convenience does not favour granting an interim injunction and the application is denied.

Citation
2001 FCT 1433
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: SUPERTEK CANADA INC.; Plaintiff/applicant: IDEAVILLAGE.COM LLC; Defendant/respondent: JACQUES GATIEN; Defendant/respondent: LES PROMOTIONS ATLANTIQUES INC./ATLANTIC PROMOTIONS INC.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Trade‑marks / Passing‑off (interim Injunction Motion) / Interim Injunction Motion (decision on Application)
Outcome
Application for interim injunction denied.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Trade‑marks Act S.7(b), Passing‑off, Irreparable Harm, Balance of Convenience, Rjr‑mac Donald Test
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Trade‑marks Passing‑off Civil Procedure Interim Injunction Trade‑marks Act S.7(b) Irreparable Harm Balance of Convenience +1 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SUPERTEK CANADA INC.

Plaintiff/applicant

IDEAVILLAGE.COM LLC

Plaintiff/applicant

JACQUES GATIEN

Defendant/respondent

LES PROMOTIONS ATLANTIQUES INC./ATLANTIC PROMOTIONS INC.

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Trade‑marks / Passing‑off (interim Injunction Motion) / Interim Injunction Motion (decision on Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants' introduction and sale of 'The Perfect Edger' caused confusion contrary to s.7(b) of the Trade‑marks Act
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction

Ratio Decidendi

Although there may be a serious issue to be tried, plaintiffs failed to establish irreparable harm and produced no evidence of consumer confusion or loss of goodwill; accordingly the balance of convenience does not favour granting an interim injunction and the application is denied.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction denied.

Orders

  • Interim injunction denied (Order dated December 18, 2001; Reasons dated December 24, 2001)