General Motors of Canada v. Décarie Motors Inc.
T-1923-97
Blais J.
13/10/98
21 pp.
Application to expunge registration of trade-mark "Décarie" and to amend registration of trade-mark "Décarie Logo Design" on grounds trade-mark previously and still not registrable; not distinctive; abandoned by respondent Décarie Motors Inc.-Applicants also submit name Décarie surname and therefore not registrable under Trade-marks Act, s. 12; name of well-known boulevard in Montréal; name not distinctive in itself; name never used alone by respondents-Application dismissed-Under Act, s. 18(1)(b), registration of trade-mark invalid if trade-mark not distinctive at time proceedings bringing validity of registration into question commenced: Steinberg Inc. v. J. L. Duval Ltée, [1993] 1 F.C. 145 (T.D.)-Distinctive quality of trade-mark must be appreciated in light of specific facts of each case-Trade-mark presumed valid when registered, and party seeking to expunge trade-mark as being invalid must bear onus of rebutting presumption; if doubt exists, must be resolved in favour of validity of trade-mark: Mr. P's Mastertune Ignition Services Ltd. v. Tune Masters Inc. (1984), 82 C.P.R. (2d) 128 (F.C.T.D.)-On judicial review, Court free to review facts to determine whether decision of Registrar or Board correct, but decision should not be set aside lightly considering expertise of those who regularly make such determinations: McDonald's Corp. v. Silverwood Industries Ltd. (1989), 24 C.P.R. (3d) 207 (F.C.T.D.)-Graphic use of word "Décarie" on automobile licence plates or on various types of graphical representations or advertising can constitute use of trade-mark: see Nightingale Interloc Ltd. v. Prodesign Ltd. (1984), 2 C.P.R. (3d) 535 (T.M. Opp. Bd.)-Not required to show exclusive use of trade-mark: Molson Breweries v. John Labatt Ltd., [1998] F.C.J. No. 929 (T.D.) (QL)-Registration of name "Décarie" and "Décarie Logo Design" made in accordance with Act, s. 12(2), defendants unequivocally demonstrated to Registrar defendants had used name Décarie without interruption since at least 1971 and Registrar agreed-Even if registration of name Décarie did not satisfy requirements of s. 12(1)(a), (b) as person's name and name of place of origin, respondents registered name under Act, s. 12(2), responded adequately to objections raised by Registrar in regard to s. 12(1)(a), (b) requirements and clearly demonstrated distinctiveness established since 1971-Registrar's decision not unreasonable in circumstances-Trademark not abandoned because evidence showed trade-mark used without interruption and with distinctive character since date of registration-Trade-marks Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. T-13, ss. 12 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 20, s. 81; 1994, c. 47, s. 193), 18.