Trademark practitioners in Canada know that consent agreements between a trademark applicant and the owner of a cited trademark are not easily accepted by the Trademarks Office (TMO). The TMO claims that it is not bound by such consents, namely because its duty is to protect the public from confusion between two registered marks, notwithstanding whether the consenting trademark owners believe that their respective marks can coexist. The only exception is with respect to “official marks”, owned by governments or “public authorities”, where the TMO is bound by such consents. A recent federal court decision reaffirms the TMO’s view in assessing consent agreements.

Want to read more?

Register to access two of our subscriber only articles per month

Subscribe for unlimited access to articles, in-depth analysis and research from the World Trademark Review experts

Already registered? Log in

What our customers are saying

World Trademark Review is a fantastic tool for IP professionals to keep current with the latest case law, innovations and trends in intellectual property.  Even though my workload is time consuming, I always make time to read and digest the World Trademark Review articles and updates. The information provided is not only timely and relevant, but thoughtfully written to engage even those who might not specialise in intellectual property.

Lauren A Dienes-Middlen
Senior vice president, assistant general counsel – intellectual property, business and legal affairs
World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc


Subscribe to World Trademark Review to receive access to the full range of trademark intelligence, insight, and case law, as well as our guides, rankings and daily market insight delivered to your inbox.

Why subscribe?

Share this article