Canada (Attorney General) v. Sarnoff Corporation
Court headnote
Canada (Attorney General) v. Sarnoff Corporation Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2009-05-05 Neutral citation 2009 FCA 142 File numbers A-357-08 Decision Content Date: 20090505 Docket: A-357-08 Citation: 2009 FCA 142 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SEXTON J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and SARNOFF CORPORATION Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. Date: 20090505 Docket: A-357-08 Citation: 2009 FCA 142 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SEXTON J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and SARNOFF CORPORATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009) LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. [1] Despite the capable submissions of the appellant’s counsel, we have not been persuaded that the applications judge’s finding of fact that the Patent Office “had to have had an appointment of associate agent” was manifestly or palpably wrong as required by Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235. There is some evidence in the record to support the factual finding as described in the reasons of the applications judge. [2] Consequently, it is not necessary to address the remaining arguments. The appeal will be dismissed, but without costs pursuant to section 25 of the Act. “Carolyn Layden-Stevenson” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAM…
Read full judgment
Canada (Attorney General) v. Sarnoff Corporation Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2009-05-05 Neutral citation 2009 FCA 142 File numbers A-357-08 Decision Content Date: 20090505 Docket: A-357-08 Citation: 2009 FCA 142 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SEXTON J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and SARNOFF CORPORATION Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. Date: 20090505 Docket: A-357-08 Citation: 2009 FCA 142 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SEXTON J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and SARNOFF CORPORATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 5, 2009) LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. [1] Despite the capable submissions of the appellant’s counsel, we have not been persuaded that the applications judge’s finding of fact that the Patent Office “had to have had an appointment of associate agent” was manifestly or palpably wrong as required by Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235. There is some evidence in the record to support the factual finding as described in the reasons of the applications judge. [2] Consequently, it is not necessary to address the remaining arguments. The appeal will be dismissed, but without costs pursuant to section 25 of the Act. “Carolyn Layden-Stevenson” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-357-08 (AN APPEAL FROM THE ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HUGHES, OF THE FEDERAL COURT, DATED JUNE 6, 2008, IN FEDERAL COURT DOCKET NO. T-1436-02.) STYLE OF CAUSE: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA v. SARNOFF CORPORATION PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: MAY 5, 2009 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: (LINDEN, SEXTON & LAYDEN-STEVENSON JJ.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. APPEARANCES: Ms. Jacqueline Dais-Visca FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. R. Scott Jolliffe Mr. Kevin Sartorio FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, ON FOR THE APPELLANT Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP Barristers & Solicitors Toronto, ON FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca