Dynaflair Corp. Canada Inc. v. Mobilflex Inc.

Dynaflair Corp. Canada Inc. v. Mobilflex Inc.

The defendants failed to meet the heavy burden of demonstrating new overriding economic or practical considerations since the 1994 dismissal; absent such justification and given res judicata principles, the application to refer the question of delivery of profits was rightly dismissed and cannot be relitigated.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2001 FCT 58
Parties
Plaintiff Respondent: Dynaflair Corporation Canada Inc.; Defendant Applicant: Mobilflex Inc.; Defendant Applicant: Produits d'Architecture de Québec 1979 Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Passing Off / Interlocutory Motion to Refer Question of Delivery of Profits/damages to a Reference Under Rule 107 (renewal of Prior 1994 Application)
Outcome
Defendants' motion for an order of reference of the question of delivery of profits dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Passing Off, Reference for Damages/profits, Res Judicata / Issue Estoppel, Disclosure/discovery
Source Language
english
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Judicial Doctrine (res Judicata) Patent Infringement Passing Off Reference for Damages/profits Res Judicata / Issue Estoppel Disclosure/discovery

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dynaflair Corporation Canada Inc.

Plaintiff Respondent

Mobilflex Inc.

Defendant Applicant

Produits d'Architecture de Québec 1979 Inc.

Defendant Applicant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Passing Off / Interlocutory Motion to Refer Question of Delivery of Profits/damages to a Reference Under Rule 107 (renewal of Prior 1994 Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the question of delivery of profits and damages should be referred to a reference under Rule 107
  2. 2 Whether there are new overriding economic or practical considerations since the 1994 dismissal to justify departure from the general rule that such issues be tried at trial
  3. 3 Whether res judicata/issue estoppel bars reconsideration of the reference application

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to meet the heavy burden of demonstrating new overriding economic or practical considerations since the 1994 dismissal; absent such justification and given res judicata principles, the application to refer the question of delivery of profits was rightly dismissed and cannot be relitigated.

Court Disposition

Defendants' motion for an order of reference of the question of delivery of profits dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Defendants' motion for an order of reference of the question of delivery of profits dismissed with costs