QAD inc. v. Stratford Holdings Corporation

QAD inc. v. Stratford Holdings Corporation Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-12-10 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 394 File numbers A-62-07 Decision Content Date: 20071210 Docket: A-62-07 Citation: 2007 FCA 394 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: QAD INC. Appellant and STRATFORD HOLDINGS CORPORATION previously known as CRANE PLUMBING CORPORATION, and CRANE PLUMBING CANADA CORP. Respondents Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on December 10, 2007. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on December 10, 2007. REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE COURT BY: PELLETIER J.A. Date: 20071210 Docket: A-62-07 Citation: 2007 FCA 394 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: QAD INC. Appellant and STRATFORD HOLDINGS CORPORATION previously known as CRANE PLUMBING CORPORATION, and CRANE PLUMBING CANADA CORP. Respondents REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on December 10, 2007) PELLETIER J.A. [1] This is an appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice O’Reilly dismissing the Appellant’s motion for summary judgment. [2] To its credit, the Respondent Crane Canada Plumbing Corp. admitted that the software in question was subject to copyright and that its use of that software was an infringement of that copyright. Nonetheless, the Motions Judge dismissed the motion without indicating why the Appellant was not entitled to an injunction restraining the admitted infringement of its statutory monopoly. Had the Motions Judge given reasons for failing to grant a discretionary remedy, we would be bound to respect the exercise of his discretion unless it was exercised on a wrong principle. [3] But where the Motions Judge gives no reason for exercising or failing to exercise his discretion in the face of an admitted breach of the Appellant’s rights, this Court has no basis upon which it can defer to the motion Judge’s decision. [4] We will therefore grant the Appellant the following relief. [5] The motion for summary judgment is granted in part. There will be a declaration that the Appellant’s rights have been infringed as set out in paragraph 2(a) (i) to (v) of the Notice of Appeal. [6] There will be an Order enjoining the respondent Crane Plumbing Canada Corp. from carrying on the activities set out at paragraphs 1(b) (i) and (ii) of the Appellant’s Statement of Claim. [7] This matter is returned to the Federal Court for trial of all other outstanding issues. [8] The Appellant is entitled to its costs here and below. “J. D. Denis Pelletier” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-62-07 (An appeal from the Order of Justice O'Reilly dated January 18, 2007, Federal Court, T-514-06.) STYLE OF CAUSE: QAD INC. Appellant and STRATFORD HOLDINGS CORPORATION previously known as CRANE PLUMBING CORPORATION, and CRANE PLUMBING CANADA CORP. Respondents PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: DECEMBER 10, 2007 REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE COURT BY: (NADON, SEXTON, PELLETIER JJ.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: PELLETIER J.A. APPEARANCES: Jonathan G. Colombo FOR THE APPELLANT/ APPLICANT R. Leigh Youd & Angela Pomerleau FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Bereskin & Parr Baristers and Solicitors Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT/ APPLICANT Berkow, Cohen LLP Barrister and Solicitors Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT