Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Dyas (TD Benefits), 2026 FC 94
Justice Tsimberis - 2026-01-21
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The trial of this trademark infringement action and other violations of the Trademarks Act was adjourned ... after the hearing of the Plaintiff’s Closing to allow the Plaintiff to file a motion under Rules 75 and 369 of the Federal Courts Rules. The Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend concerned the parties’ Joint Statement of Issues, filed on ... the fifth day of trial. ... The Plaintiff argues that its removal of TMA ‘911 instead of TMA ‘831 from Schedule “A” is an obvious error as there is no logical reason for the Plaintiff to have removed a broader registration TMA ‘911 in place of the version of the TD Shield Design trademark containing the colour claim, namely TMA ‘831. ... As I found above, the proposed amendment is not proper because the overriding consideration of the interests of justice militates against it being allowed at this very late stage of the trial and in the circumstances of this case where multiple SOI and documents confirming the narrowing of the issues to exclude TMA ‘911 were filed from the outset of the trial and extended to the Closing. Based on this finding, I am of the view that that they militate against allowing an amendment even where no prejudice is expressly alleged. The Plaintiff’s failure to show that the amendment would serve the interests of justice requires the Motion to Amend to be refused.
Decision relates to:
- T-886-21 - THE TORONTO-DOMINION BANK v. THOMAS JOHN DYAS ET AL
- A-63-26 - which is an appeal from this decision