Bauer Hockey corp. v. Therma Blade Inc.

Bauer Hockey corp. v. Therma Blade Inc.

Applying the Martin two-part test the court found that Brouillette had acquired confidential information relevant to registration '683 and Bauer's chain of title; Therma Blade and its counsel failed to rebut the presumption or show clear and convincing evidence of screening; therefore the risk of prejudice existed and Brouillette & Partners LLP was disqualified from representing Therma Blade.

Citation
2009 FC 260
Parties
Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: Bauer Hockey Corp.; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Therma Blade Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Trademark Infringement / Intellectual Property / Motion to Disqualify Counsel
Outcome
Brouillette & Partners LLP disqualified from representing Therma Blade Inc.; Bauer granted additional time to file response and statement of defence to counterclaim; costs awarded to Bauer.
Legal Topics
Conflict of Interest, Disqualification of Counsel, Confidential Information, Chain of Title, Attorney Client Privilege
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Trademark Professional Responsibility Civil Procedure Conflict of Interest Disqualification of Counsel Confidential Information Chain of Title +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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bauer Hockey Corp.

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

Therma Blade Inc.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Trademark Infringement / Intellectual Property / Motion to Disqualify Counsel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lawyer received confidential information in a prior retainer relevant to the current litigation
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk that such information will be used to the prejudice of the former client
  3. 3 Whether the entire firm must be disqualified where the tainted lawyer remains in the firm

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Martin two-part test the court found that Brouillette had acquired confidential information relevant to registration '683 and Bauer's chain of title; Therma Blade and its counsel failed to rebut the presumption or show clear and convincing evidence of screening; therefore the risk of prejudice existed and Brouillette & Partners LLP was disqualified from representing Therma Blade.

Court Disposition

Brouillette & Partners LLP disqualified from representing Therma Blade Inc.; Bauer granted additional time to file response and statement of defence to counterclaim; costs awarded to Bauer.

Orders

  • Brouillette & Partners LLP is disqualified from representing Therma Blade Inc. in this action.
  • Bauer Hockey Corp. is permitted to file its response and statement of defence to the counterclaim within twenty (20) days of the date of this order.