Bell Canada v. Us West, Inc.

Bell Canada v. Us West, Inc.

Read in context, many defence paragraphs were not plainly without cause and thus not struck and no further particulars were ordered; however, discrete pleaded causes of action in the counterclaims that assert torts and remedies beyond the scope of s.7 of the Trade-marks Act are outside the statutory jurisdiction of the Federal Court and those paragraphs were struck; certain phrases alleging 'unlawful interference with economic and contractual relations, injurious falsehood and intimidation' were struck from damage claims.

Citation
2001 FCT 69
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant to Counterclaim: Bell Canada; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: US West, Inc.; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Unical Enterprises, Inc.; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim and Plaintiff in Third Party Claim: Sonigem Products Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property (trade Marks) With Counterclaims / Motion to Strike Pleadings and for Particulars (pre Trial)
Outcome
Motion partly granted and partly dismissed: specified paragraphs and phrases struck for lack of Federal Court jurisdiction; remainder of motion dismissed; plaintiff to file reply/defence to counterclaims within 30 days; no costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Trade Marks Act S.7, Striking Pleadings (rule 221), Particulars, Acquiescence, Damages, Jurisdictional Limits
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Federal Court Jurisdiction Trade Marks Act S.7 Striking Pleadings (rule 221) Particulars Acquiescence Damages +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bell Canada

Plaintiff/defendant to Counterclaim

US West, Inc.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Unical Enterprises, Inc.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Sonigem Products Inc.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim and Plaintiff in Third Party Claim

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property (trade Marks) With Counterclaims / Motion to Strike Pleadings and for Particulars (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether specific defence paragraphs disclose no reasonable cause of defence and should be struck under Rule 221(1)(a)
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff is entitled to further particulars to plead and prepare a defence
  3. 3 Whether counterclaim allegations fall outside the statutory jurisdiction of the Federal Court

Ratio Decidendi

Read in context, many defence paragraphs were not plainly without cause and thus not struck and no further particulars were ordered; however, discrete pleaded causes of action in the counterclaims that assert torts and remedies beyond the scope of s.7 of the Trade-marks Act are outside the statutory jurisdiction of the Federal Court and those paragraphs were struck; certain phrases alleging 'unlawful interference with economic and contractual relations, injurious falsehood and intimidation' were struck from damage claims.

Court Disposition

Motion partly granted and partly dismissed: specified paragraphs and phrases struck for lack of Federal Court jurisdiction; remainder of motion dismissed; plaintiff to file reply/defence to counterclaims within 30 days; no costs ordered.

Orders

  • Strike paragraphs alleging entitlement to sell product: US West paragraph 35(b); Unical paragraph 52 C; Sonigem paragraph 41(b)
  • Strike paragraphs alleging 'unlawful interference with economic and contractual relations': US West paragraphs 35(d) and 46; Sonigem paragraph 41(d)