Miller Thomson LLP v. Hilton Worldwide Holding LLP, 2020 FCA 134
Justice Mactavish; Justice Webb; Justice Near - 0000-00-00
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The principal issue raised by this appeal is whether Hilton can establish “use” of the WALDORF ASTORIA trademark in Canada for the purposes of section 45 of the Trademarks Act in the absence of a “bricks and mortar” hotel operating under that name in this country. For the reasons that follow, I have concluded that the Federal Court did not err (in reasons cited as 2018 FC 895) in finding that Hilton had established use of the WALDORF ASTORIA mark in Canada. Consequently, I would dismiss the appeal. ... In this case, the Federal Court was alive to the concern articulated in Unicast, specifically citing that decision as authority for the proposition that “the concept of performing services is key”, and that “it is essential that some aspect of the services must be offered directly to Canadians or performed in Canada”. On the evidence before it, the Court was nevertheless satisfied that some aspects of “hotel services” were performed in Canada, and that Canadians could receive a meaningful benefit in this country from those services.
Decision relates to:
- A-325-18 - MILLER THOMSON LLP v. HILTON WORLDWIDE HOLDING LLP which is an appeal from 2018 FC 895 in T-515-17
- A-369-18 - MILLER THOMSON LLP v. HILTON WORLDWIDE HOLDING LLP which is an appeal from a decision dated 2018-11-06 in T-515-17