Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Trade Marks: Changes to the canadian trade marks act
By Donvay Wegierski, Director

On 17 June 2019, the Canadian Trade Marks Act will be introducing several changes pursuant to it joining the Madrid Protocol, most significantly that it is no longer necessary to provide evidence of use of a mark in Canada to secure registration. With North America being a major trading partner for South Africa, these changes may also present new opportunities for unauthorised third parties, therefore brand owners are advised to ensure that they are adequately protected.
It is anticipated that the Canadian trade mark office will receive an influx of new trade mark applications. The most important changes are set out in the below table:
| CURRENT | AMENDMENT AS OF 17 JUNE 2019 | |
| I | A Declaration of Use of the mark in Canada is required to attain registration. | The “Use” requirement will be removed with no requirement to state a date of first use of the mark in Canada and registration and use abroad. |
| II | There is no Classification system thereby allowing for wide specifications and the payment of a fee for one class. | The International Nice Classification system will be introduced, separating goods and services also requiring the payment of Government fees per class. |
| III | The renewal term is fifteen years. | The renewal term will be reduced to ten years subject to the following:
|
| IV | International designations are not possible. | Canada will join the Madrid Protocol allowing international applications with a centrally administered system, designating member states in which they also want to obtain national protection. To do so the Canadian applicant must already own a domestic (i.e. Canadian) registration. |
| V | The Registrar does not recognise divisional applications. | It will be possible to divide applications permitting non-contentious portions of trade mark applications to proceed to registration while the remainder of the application undergoes examination. |
| VI | Non-use cancellation proceedings cannot be restricted to certain goods and services in a registration. | Non-use cancellation proceedings may be restricted. The non-use term remains three years from date of registration. |
CONSIDERATIONS
- It is anticipated that by removing the requirement to show “Use” that there will be a significant increase in trade mark applications with the result that trade mark owners will need to be even more vigilant, possibly introducing watch services if not yet in place.
- If it is possible to file a Declaration of Use of the mark prior to 17 June 2019, this is recommended attaining a 15 year term of protection as opposed to the new 10 year term.
- Trade mark filing costs will increase if the goods and services fall within more than one class. Should Canada be a territory of interest, it may prove more cost effective to file the trade mark application prior to 17 June 2019.
- Trade marks will also include marks such as colour or a combination of colours, taste, textures, scent, sound, moving images, holograms and 3D shapes.
If you would like to learn more about Intellectual Property please visit our practice area page.
Latest News
The metaverse and data privacy: Will regulation keep up?
What is the metaverse? On 28 October 2021, Facebook Inc.'s chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg announced the rebranding of his [...]
The PAIA and POPIA dichotomy: What information are you requesting?
Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2 of 2000 We have received numerous queries from clients seeking advice on attending [...]
Security for costs – A White Elephant? A Chimera? Pie in the sky? …On any basis a Herculean task
Security for costs In the recent case of McHugh N.O. & Others v Wright [5641/2021) [2021] ZAWCHC 205 (19 October [...]
Merger approval without a specific acquiring or target firm
Merger approval The Competition Act 89 of 1998 ("Competition Act") and Commission Rules[1] contain review provisions that establish a mandatory [...]
Data protection impact assessment required despite “Might of the State”
Kenyan High Court Introduction On 14 October 2021, the Kenyan High Court declared the collection of biometric information and the [...]
Relief from oppressive or prejudicial conduct in terms of the Companies Act 71 of 2008
Section 163 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 In any corporate environment, the authority of the board of directors, [...]
