16 result(s)
-
1.
Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform ("COMER") v. Canada - 2013 FC 855 - 2013-08-09
Federal Court DecisionsCommittee for Monetary and Economic Reform ("COMER") v. Canada, Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (“COMER”) c. Canada, 2013 FC 855, 2013 CF 855, T-2010-11 [...] The individual Plaintiffs are members of COMER who have an interest in economic policy (collectively the Plaintiffs are referred to as COMER). [...] COMER’s Position [35] COMER submits that the high threshold for striking out the Claim has not been met.
-
2.
Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (“COMER”) v. Canada - 2016 FC 147 - 2016-02-08
Federal Court DecisionsCommittee for Monetary and Economic Reform (“COMER”) v. Canada, Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (“COMER”) c. Canada, 2016 FC 147, 2016 CF 147, T-2010-11 [...] COMMITTEE FOR MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM (“COMER”), WILLIAM KREHM, AND ANN EMMETT [...] The individual Plaintiffs are members of COMER who have an interest in economic policy.
-
3.
Committe for Monetary and Economic Reform v. Canada - 2014 FC 380 - 2014-04-24
Federal Court DecisionsCOMMITTE FOR MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM ("COMER"), WILLIAM KREHM, AND ANN EMMETT [...] The individual Plaintiffs are members of COMER who have an interest in economic policy. [...] [69] COMER argues that the issue in dispute is not about socio-economic policy and whether it is correct but rather whether or not the implementation of the Bank Act provisions violates the rights of COMER.
-
4.
Skinner v. Fedex Ground Ltd. - 2014 FC 426 - 2014-05-06
Federal Court DecisionsThe money to be acquired on the successful execution of the plan would be represented by the image of a bag of money in the top comer of the television screen.
-
5.
Hazime v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 793 - 2011-06-29
Federal Court DecisionsIn the present matter, that is someone who is of Arab descent who is a foreigner or a new-comer to Venezuela.
-
6.
Singh Gill v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 863 - 2011-07-11
Federal Court Decisions[26] Though the Applicant’s degree of establishment might be commendable and the success he experienced as a new-comer to Canada more unlikely given his limited education, the Officer still has the discretion to determine how to weigh these considerations.
-
7.
F.C. Yachts Ltd. v. Vessel Bearing Hull No. QFY10703E709 (Yacht) - 2007 FC 1257 - 2007-11-30
Federal Court DecisionsIn the Jensen Star, Mr. Justice Marceau referred to Coastal Equipment Agencies Ltd. v. Comer (The), [1970] Ex. C.R. 13, where Mr. Justice Noël set out much of that history.
-
8.
Price v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2016 FC 649 - 2016-06-10
Federal Court DecisionsIn cases where matters are not fully settled by the jurisprudence, the Court should hesitate to strike a motion for want of jurisdiction because complex questions of statutory interpretation are better left for argument at trial (Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (“COMER”) v R, 2016 FC 147 at para 68).
-
9.
Reckitt Benckiser LLC v. Jamieson Laboratories Ltd - 2015 FC 215 - 2015-02-20
Federal Court Decisions[66] Nor do I agree with Jamieson that the Plaintiffs are “second comers” to Jamieson. [...] As between the holder of a registered Canadian trade-mark and a likely infringer, the likely infringer can only be a second comer, if the infringer has any rights at all.
-
10.
Wrangler Apparel Corporation v. Big Rock Brewery Limited Partnership - 2010 FC 477 - 2010-04-30
Federal Court DecisionsThe question is whether this mythical consumer with a vague recollection of the first mark will, on seeing the second comer’s mark, infer as a matter of first impression that the wares with which the second mark is used are in some way associated with the wares bearing the first mark (see United States Polo Assn. v. Polo
-
11.
Lin v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 1329 - 2021-11-30
Federal Court DecisionsHe saw the van strike the gray car out of the comer of his eye. He could not say what the van was doing prior to the collision and did not know why it did not stop.
-
12.
JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Mystras Maritime Corp. - 2005 FC 864 - 2005-06-17
Federal Court DecisionsThat law is conveniently summarized in Coastal Equipment Agencies Ltd. v. The Ship "Comer", [1970] Ex. C.R. 12; Mount Royal/Walsh Inc. v. The Ship Jensen Star, [1990] 1 F.C. 199 (C.A.).
-
13.
Su v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 645 - 2017-07-04
Federal Court DecisionsThe Applicant stated, based on the email and letters from Brian Jarvis, the Inspector and Dr. Hossack, he thought they were “new comers to my case”.
-
14.
Michelin v. Caw - 1996-12-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe managers were unable to locate the authors but the Plaintiff' intent on protecting its interests and private property against all comers is apparent.
-
15.
Kirkbi AG v. Ritvik Holdings Inc. - 2002 FCT 585 - 2002-05-24
Federal Court Decisions[138] The plaintiffs rely on Reckitt & Colman Products Limited v. Borden Inc. & Ors[72] for the propositions that adoption of a get-up likely to create confusion constitutes a misrepresentation[73] and that a defendant which is a second-comer in a field should take steps to distinguish its products from those of a
-
16.
Almrei (Re) - 2009 FC 1263 - 2009-12-14
Federal Court DecisionsHe was a late-comer to the Afghan jihad but participated in the fighting at the same time as Bin Laden.