Ruhl Estate v. Mannesmann Kienzle GMBH
T-1610-95
Gibson J.
15/10/97
17 pp.
Application for summary judgment against defendant in action for copyright infringement of Ruhl tachograph chart (used for recording certain data in connection with operation of motor vehicles)-Feoso Oil Ltd. v. Sarla (The), [1995] 3 F.C. 68 (C.A.) applied-Principles restated in Granville Shipping Co. v. Pegasus Lines Ltd., [1996] 2 F.C. 853 (T.D.): (1) purpose of provisions (RR. 432.1, 432.2, 432.3) to summarily dispense with cases which ought not to proceed to trial because no genuine issue to be tried; (2) whether case so doubtful it does not deserve consideration by trier of fact at future trial; (3) each case to be interpreted in reference to own contextual framework; (4) provincial practice rules can aid in interpretation; (5) Court may determine questions of fact and law on motion for summary judgment if can do so on material before it; (6) on whole of evidence, summary judgment cannot be granted if necessary facts cannot be found or if unjust to do so (onus lying with applicant for summary judgment); (7) in case of serious issue with respect to credibility, case should go to trial-Respondents herein have brought forth evidence showing genuine issue for trial-Serious issue with respect to credibility making it necessary to go to trial to provide opportunity for witnesses to be cross-examined before trial judge-Application dismissed-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, RR. 432.1 (as enacted by SOR/94-41, s. 5), 432.2 (as enacted idem), 432.3 (as enacted idem).