Canadian Gasket & Supply Inc. v. Industrial Gasket & Shim Company, Inc.

Canadian Gasket & Supply Inc. v. Industrial Gasket & Shim Company, Inc.

Given the 1996 licence/distributorship agreement and the appellant's admissions that it never had the formula or manufactured the product, there was no triable issue that the appellant owned the product, so partial summary judgment was proper; however, declaring IGS the owner was improper without a counterclaim.

Citation
2007 ONCA 894
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): CANADIAN GASKET & SUPPLY INC.; Defendant (respondent): INDUSTRIAL GASKET & SHIM COMPANY, INC.; Defendant (respondent): TROCKI-GORDON SUPPLY INC.; Defendant (respondent): JOSEPH TROCKI; Defendant (respondent): LEONARD GORDON
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Motion Decision (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; paragraph 2 of the June 22, 2007 judgment struck; otherwise the judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Ownership, Confidential Information, Declaratory Relief, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Property Intellectual Property Contract Summary Judgment Ownership Confidential Information Declaratory Relief +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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CANADIAN GASKET & SUPPLY INC.

Plaintiff (appellant)

INDUSTRIAL GASKET & SHIM COMPANY, INC.

Defendant (respondent)

TROCKI-GORDON SUPPLY INC.

Defendant (respondent)

JOSEPH TROCKI

Defendant (respondent)

LEONARD GORDON

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Motion Decision (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant owned the product or the confidential formula and method of manufacture
  2. 2 Whether the motion judge erred in granting partial summary judgment on ownership
  3. 3 Whether a declaration that IGS owns the product could be granted without a counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

Given the 1996 licence/distributorship agreement and the appellant's admissions that it never had the formula or manufactured the product, there was no triable issue that the appellant owned the product, so partial summary judgment was proper; however, declaring IGS the owner was improper without a counterclaim.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; paragraph 2 of the June 22, 2007 judgment struck; otherwise the judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Paragraph 2 of the judgment dated June 22, 2007 struck
  • All other parts of the judgment dated June 22, 2007 remain in full force and effect