Supreme Court of Canada: Intellectual Property Appeals

The following intellectual property cases are active before the Supreme Court of Canada. This list is automatically generated daily. Please contact me if you notice any errors or inconsistencies.

Return to litigation data.

[Listing generated on May 31, 2023]

Proceedings waiting for rulings

The following intellectual property appeals are awaiting judgment from the Supreme Court of Canada.

SCC File No. Status Style of Cause Appeal File No. Excerpt from Appeal Decision

Application for leave

Applications for leave to appeal have been filed on the following intellectual property related proceedings.

SCC File No. Status Style of Cause Appeal File No. Excerpt from Appeal Decision
40354 Application for leave filed 2022-09-15 Licensing IP International S.À.R.L., et al. v. Sweet Productions Inc., et al. A-100-21 2022 FCA 111: This is an appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court (per Justice Zinn) dated March 10, 2021, allowing an appeal of Prothonotary’s Steele’s Order dated October 16, 2020, and dismissing the underlying action brought by the appellants for copyright infringement in respect of cinematographic works appearing on the respondents’ “Pornhub websites”. The main issue on this appeal (and before the Federal Court) relates to the proper remedy when undue delay has been found pursuant to Rule 167 of the Federal Courts Rules. More specifically, should the Court start with the presumption of dismissal if undue delay is found, as determined by the Federal Court, or is the Court’s discretion unfettered and dismissal only to be used as a remedy of last resort? … Accordingly, I would allow the appeal in part, set aside the Federal Court’s judgment in relation to Rule 167, and reinstate the Prothonotary’s Order that the underlying action proceed as a specially managed proceeding.
40641 Application for leave filed 2023-03-13 Puma SE v. Caterpillar Inc. A-276-21 2023 FCA 4: Puma challenges the decision 2021 FC 974. The Judge allowed an appeal brought by Caterpillar from a decision of the Trademarks Opposition Board 2017 TMOB 114. The Judge accordingly refused Puma’s application for registration of its proposed mark, “procat”, pursuant to subsection 38(12) of the Trademarks Act. For the reasons that follow, I would dismiss Puma’s appeal. … The issues to be addressed in this appeal are accordingly framed as follows: Did the Judge err in concluding that there is a likelihood of confusion, more particularly in finding that (a) inherent distinctiveness and the extent to which the parties’ marks are known favours Caterpillar; (b) the degree of resemblance factor favours Caterpillar; and (c) the surrounding circumstances do not favour Puma.
40654 Application for leave filed 2023-03-28 The Ministry of Energy, Commerce and Industry of the Republic of Cyprus v. 3878422 Canada Inc., La Maison Alexis de Portneuf Inc. and Saputo Produits Laitiers Canada s.e.n.c. 2023 QCCA 94: The trial judge was therefore required to determine whether respondents had sold or marketed cheese “in association with the trade-mark HALOMI or with any other trade-mark confusingly similar with HALLOUMI or HALOMI”. … In the judge’s opinion, the word “Haloumi” that appears on packaging for cheese sold by respondent MAPI was not used as a trademark, but rather for the purpose of describing the type of cheese sold, in the same manner that the words “cheddar”, “mozzarella” and “brie” serve to describe other types of cheese. … Ultimately, the appellant has not shown a palpable and overriding error in the trial judge’s findings of fact that led him to conclude that the word “Haloumi” is used descriptively on the packaging for cheese sold and/or marketed by the respondents and that the latter did not breach their contractual undertakings.

Return to top.


  • It is highly recommended that you consult the primary source for documents provided by this website, such as the Federal Court of Canada or the various patent offices, to ensure that you have an accurate, up to date version of the information you require. I take no responsibilities for errors or out-dated information found on this website.
  • Medicinal ingredients are based on automated analysis and should not be relied upon.

Canadian Intellectual Property