Dermaspark Products Inc. v. Ipince, 2025 FC 946
Associate Justice Duchesne - 2025-05-27
Read full decision. Generated by ChatGPT:
In this case, a motion for default judgment was brought by the plaintiffs against the defendant due to the latter's failure to file a statement of defence within the stipulated time frame. The court clarified that under Rule 210 of the Federal Courts Rules, default judgment is appropriate when the defendant is in default and the plaintiff substantiates their claims on a balance of probabilities. The plaintiffs sought various declarations regarding the ownership and rights associated with their trademarks, claiming infringement and passing off by the defendant, who allegedly engaged in activities that caused confusion in the marketplace. The court found the plaintiffs met the burden of proof and granted the default judgment in part, which included declarations of ownership of trademarks, injunctions against the defendant’s use of the trademarks, and a requirement for the defendant to recall related materials.
Decision relates to:
- T-488-24 - DERMASPARK PRODUCTS INC. et Al. v. DANIELLE IPINCE