TRADE‑MARKS
Registration
Appeal from Registrar of Trade‑marks’s decision trade‑mark “Aeropeak by de Ungava” unlikely to cause confusion with appellant’s “Arrow” type marks—Registrar correctly applying criteria set out in Trade‑marks Act, s. 6(5) in determining whether use of trade‑mark respondent wished to register would cause confusion—Trade‑marks Act, s. 6(2) covers ways in which trade‑marks can cause confusion—Court must consider all circumstances, including criteria enumerated in section 6(5)—Marks not resembling each other either visually, in terms of ideas suggested, or in terms of their consonance— Words “Aeropeak by de Ungava” bearing absolutely no resemblance, phonetically or otherwise, to word “Arrow”— Registrar correctly applying relevant provisions of Trade‑ marks Act and rightly dismissing appellant’s objection —Registration of mark “Aeropeak by de Ungava” unlikely to create confusion within meaning of s. 12(1)(d)—Appeal dismissed—Trade‑marks Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. T‑13, ss. 6, 12 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 20, s. 81; S.C. 1993, c. 15, s. 59(F); S.C. 1994, c. 47, s. 193).
Cluett, Peabody Canada Inc. v. Effigi Inc. (T‑1549‑04, 2005 FC 400, de Montigny J., order dated 23/3/05, 18 pp.)