Constellation Brands U.S. Operations, Inc. v. The Vineyard House, LLC, 2026 FC 866
Justice Whyte Nowak - 2026-06-25
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The Applicant, Constellation is appealing a decision of the TMOB (2025 TMOB 214) and brings this motion for leave to adduce additional evidence on the appeal pursuant to subsection 56(5) of the Trademarks Act. ... I find that the proposed evidence fails to meet the test for leave established in Products Unlimited whether by reason of its relevance, admissibility, or materiality and taking into account Constellation’s failure to explain why certain marketing evidence was not produced earlier. ... there is simply no basis to support a Rule 151 order sealing the information from public view. ... I agree with TVH that paragraph 28 of the Affidavit is inadmissible opinion evidence providing inferences and opinion from the fact evidence and as such, cannot be given by a fact witness ... I find that the lack of precision in the sales evidence in paragraphs 24 and 25, renders it of little assistance to the Board in determining the extent of the use of the Constellation Marks or their acquired distinctiveness ... Based on my consideration of the factors in Products Unlimited, I find that it is not in the interest of justice to grant leave to Constellation to file the Affidavit on the Appeal.
Decision relates to:
- T-5221-25 - Constellation Brands US Operations, Inc v. The Vineyard House, LLC