In this case, Voltage Pictures, LLC, a group of production companies (“Voltage”), sought certification of a respondent class proceeding, known as a “reverse class action.” Voltage alleged copyright infringement of five of its films and contended that the Appellant, and Respondent on cross-appeal, Robert Salna, had infringed its copyright by enabling the films to be downloaded through BitTorrent, a protocol for peer-to-peer sharing.

This decision of the Court of Appeal on costs follows the Court’s decision of May 26, 2021, in which it upheld a Federal Court decision awarding the respondents an interlocutory injunction in a copyright infringement action.

In 1997, Eli Lilly US and Eli Lilly Canada (collectively, “Eli Lilly”) brought an action against Apotex Inc., (“Apotex”) claiming damages for patent infringement under s.55(1) of the Patent Act for its bulk import of cefaclor for use in Apo-cefaclor, which it sold in Canada. In 2014, the Federal Court awarded damages for lost profits, and an award of compound interest. Apotex appealed both.

This matter dealt with an appeal of the decision of the Prothonotary directing to order a corporation to appoint counsel.

Glowfish LLC (“Glofish”) brought proceedings seeking injunctions under the Trademarks Act (the “TMA”), Canadian Environment Protection Act, 1999 (the “CEPA”), and New Substances Notification Regulations (Organisms) as against Oceanview Enterprise (“Oceanview”) and Animalerie Auqa Terra (“Aqua Terra”) with respect to various activities involving genetically engineered fluorescent fish.

Tokai filed a trademark application for KING for barbeque and fireplace lighters, and for cigarette lighters. Kingsford successfully opposed the application based upon its KINGSFORD marks. Tokai brought an appeal to the Federal Court, principally basing its appeal on the issue of likelihood of confusion between KING and registrations for KINGSFORD.

The Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (“TRREB”) brought an ex parte motion for default judgment for copyright infringement of its TRREB MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE (“TRREB MLS”) System against the corporate defendant R E Stats Inc. operating as ReDatum (“ReDatum”) seeking $250,000 in damages.

This appeal dealt with a judgment of the Federal Court, which dismissed an application for judicial review brought by Alexion in respect of a decision by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (the “Board”). The Board had concluded that Alexion priced its Soliris product excessively contrary to the Patent Act and ordered Alexion to forfeit excess revenues earned between 2009 and 2017.

After a summary judgment in favour of the plaintiff in this copyright infringement action, the Court was asked to resolve the parties’ disparate views on costs.

Geox S.p.A. (“Geox”) appealed a Federal Court decision that dismissed its appeal of a decision by the Trademarks Opposition Board (“TMOB”). In its decision, the TMOB amended the registration of the trademark ANFIBIO & Design, owned by Giuseppe De Luca, deleting the goods “shoes,” but maintaining the goods “boots” pursuant to subsection 45(3) of the Trademarks Act (non-use).