Skip to main content
Supreme Court of Canada· 1918

Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co.

(1918) 57 SCR 606
PropertyJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co. Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1918-11-18 Report (1918) 57 SCR 606 On appeal from Canada Subjects Intellectual property Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co., (1918) 57 S.C.R. 606 Date: 1918-11-18 Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co. 1918: October 24, 25; 1918: November 18. ON APPEAL FROM THE EXCHEQUER COURT OF CANADA. Patent—Process—Importation. APPEAL from the judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada[1], in favour of the plaintiffs (respondents). The respondents by their action claimed damages for infringement of their patent for the process of bleaching flour and an injunction. The defendants alleged that the patent was void for importation of the invention. The invention was for bleaching flour by subjecting it to a specified oxidising agent and what was imported was a machine for making this agent. The Exchequer Court held that this was not importation of the invention. The Supreme Court of Canada after argument reserved judgment and eventually affirmed the judgment of the Exchequer Court. Appeal dismissed with costs. Fetherstonaugh K.C. and Russell Smart for the appellants. McKay K.C. for the respondents. [1] 16 Ex. C.R. 507; 35 D.L.R. 353. …

Read full judgment
Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co.
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1918-11-18
Report
(1918) 57 SCR 606
On appeal from
Canada
Subjects
Intellectual property
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co., (1918) 57 S.C.R. 606
Date: 1918-11-18
Friesen & Son v. Alsop Process Co.
1918: October 24, 25; 1918: November 18.
ON APPEAL FROM THE EXCHEQUER COURT OF CANADA.
Patent—Process—Importation.
APPEAL from the judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada[1], in favour of the plaintiffs (respondents).
The respondents by their action claimed damages for infringement of their patent for the process of bleaching flour and an injunction. The defendants alleged that the patent was void for importation of the invention.
The invention was for bleaching flour by subjecting it to a specified oxidising agent and what was imported was a machine for making this agent. The Exchequer Court held that this was not importation of the invention.
The Supreme Court of Canada after argument reserved judgment and eventually affirmed the judgment of the Exchequer Court.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Fetherstonaugh K.C. and Russell Smart for the appellants.
McKay K.C. for the respondents.
[1] 16 Ex. C.R. 507; 35 D.L.R. 353.

Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca

Related cases