Likelihood of confusion between applicant’s services and respondent’s wares

Federal court | Industrial and Intellectual Property


Likelihood of confusion between applicant’s services and respondent’s wares

This was appeal from board’s decision refusing applicant’s application to register trademark. Applicant operated retail stores that specialized in sale of products including vitamins, nutritional supplements and fitness products. Applicant applied to register trade-mark “Nature’s Source” in association with services including retail store, franchising and e-commerce services. Respondent manufactured and sold healthy snack foods such as cereals, nuts and cookies under trademark “Natursource.” Respondent’s trademark was registered in 1983. Board found that there was likelihood of confusion with respondent’s trademark used in association with retail, franchising, and e-commerce services and refused to register applicant’s trademark. Appeal dismissed. Additional evidence filed by parties was not significant and would not have influenced board’s decision. As additional evidence was not material, standard of review was reasonableness. Question to be asked was whether, as matter of first impression, casual consumer somewhat in hurry who saw applicant’s trademark in association with service of selling various natural products, having no more than imperfect recollection of respondent’s trademark or trade name in association with wares it manufactured, would likely think that applicant’s services were of same source as respondent’s products. Board’s decision fell within range of possible, acceptable outcomes. It was not unreasonable for board to conclude that there was some kind of connection between applicant’s services and respondent’s wares.
Natursource Inc. v. Nature’s Source Inc. (July 20, 2012, F.C., Bedard J., File No. T-463-09) Decision at 72 C.P.R. (4th) 423 was affirmed. 220 A.C.W.S. (3d) 608.

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Disability claims involving toxic workplace allegations surge with return to office: injury lawyer

Finalizing divorce should not bar subsequent civil claim for sexual assault: lawyer Kevin McLaren

Cecile Applegate appointed as regional senior justice to the Ontario Court of Justice

Ontario Superior Court overturns arbitrator’s award in homebuyers’ contract dispute

Ontario Superior Court adjourns motion to add insurer as defendant in personal injury case

What to do if you’re a passenger in a car accident in Ontario

Most Read Articles

Recent Canadaland-WE Charity ruling example of anti-SLAPP 'misuse' says lawyer

Convocation: benchers approve research funding to underpin renewed equity agenda

Ontario Superior Court rejects plaintiff's bid for a simplified procedure in a car collision case

Ontario Superior Court enforces arbitral award despite improper notice claim