Alliance Laundry Systems LLC v. Whirlpool Canada LP

Alliance Laundry Systems LLC v. Whirlpool Canada LP

The Hearing Officer's conclusion that the respondent established use during the relevant period was reasonable because the affidavit contained factual assertions of sales in Canada during the decade including the relevant period and the photographs showing the mark on the wares satisfied s.4(1); invoices dated...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2014 FC 1224
Parties
Applicant: Alliance Laundry Systems LLC; Respondent: Whirlpool Canada LP
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Trade Marks Act S.56 / Judicial Review of Hearing Officer Decision on S.45 Notice; Amended Judgment and Reasons
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Hearing Officer decision maintained
Legal Topics
Use of Trade Mark, Section 45 Notice, Expungement of Registration, Standard of Review Reasonableness, Deemed Use Under S.4(1)
Source Language
english
Trade Marks Intellectual Property Administrative Law Use of Trade Mark Section 45 Notice Expungement of Registration Standard of Review Reasonableness Deemed Use Under S.4(1)

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alliance Laundry Systems LLC

Applicant

Whirlpool Canada LP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Trade Marks Act S.56 / Judicial Review of Hearing Officer Decision on S.45 Notice; Amended Judgment and Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent established use of the trade-mark during the relevant period (Oct 5, 2008 to Oct 5, 2011)
  2. 2 Whether the Hearing Officer reasonably relied on the affidavit, photographs and invoices to infer use during the relevant period
  3. 3 Whether invoices dated after the relevant period could corroborate use during the relevant period

Ratio Decidendi

The Hearing Officer's conclusion that the respondent established use during the relevant period was reasonable because the affidavit contained factual assertions of sales in Canada during the decade including the relevant period and the photographs showing the mark on the wares satisfied s.4(1); invoices dated shortly after the period could reasonably corroborate continuity of sales and were not determinative but supported the finding given the low evidentiary threshold for s.45 proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Hearing Officer decision maintained

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs in favour of respondent
  • Registration expunged for all wares and services except laundry washing machines and laundry dryers