Canadianmagicjack.ca Ltd v. MagicJack LP

Canadianmagicjack.ca Ltd v. MagicJack LP

The appeals were dismissed because the appellants failed to comply with status review requirements: they were not represented by counsel nor had leave for an officer to act, they failed to justify the delay or propose a timetable or measures to perfect the appeals, and they failed to demonstrate an arguable case;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2013 FC 152
Parties
Appellant: CANADIANMAGICJACK.CA LTD; Appellant: THEMAGICJACK.CA INC; Respondent: MAGICJACK LP
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under the Trade Marks Act and Judicial Review of Trade Marks Opposition Board Decisions / Appeal From Dismissal for Delay Following Notice of Status Review (rule 382)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed without costs.
Legal Topics
Status Review, Dismissal for Delay, Corporate Representation, Extension of Time, Appealability of Directions, Record/perfection of Appeal
Source Language
english
Trade Marks Administrative Law Civil Procedure Status Review Dismissal for Delay Corporate Representation Extension of Time Appealability of Directions +1 more

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 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CANADIANMAGICJACK.CA LTD

Appellant

THEMAGICJACK.CA INC

Appellant

MAGICJACK LP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under the Trade Marks Act and Judicial Review of Trade Marks Opposition Board Decisions / Appeal From Dismissal for Delay Following Notice of Status Review (rule 382)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prothonotary properly dismissed the proceedings for delay under Rule 382/382.1
  2. 2 Whether a corporation may be represented by an officer rather than counsel under Rule 120
  3. 3 Whether the appellants justified the delay and proposed an appropriate timetable to move the proceedings forward

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals were dismissed because the appellants failed to comply with status review requirements: they were not represented by counsel nor had leave for an officer to act, they failed to justify the delay or propose a timetable or measures to perfect the appeals, and they failed to demonstrate an arguable case; dismissal for delay was therefore appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed without costs.

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed without costs.
  • A copy of these reasons for order and order are to be placed in court docket number T-333-12 and apply there accordingly.