Canada Post Corp. v. Micropost Corp.
T-1978-97
Hugessen J.
26/11/98
8 pp.
Appeal against Registrar of Trade-marks' decision dismissing opposition by appellant to respondent's application to register "Micropost" for use in association with "point of sale terminals incorporating all purpose cash register and typing functions"-Appeal dismissed-Appellant's assertion of virtual monopoly on use of word "post" unacceptable-Word "post" in English has great variety of meanings, most of which do not describe or even suggest wares and services provided by appellant-"Post" common part of name of magazines and newspapers, hotels and breakfast cereals-Therefore, no reasonable person would assume, infer or suggest that because trade-mark contains word "post", it must, in some way, be connected to appellant-New or expanded products of appellant, such as "Intelpost", "Telepost" etc. must bear relationship to appellant's primary business of carrying mail-Appellant may have monopoly of word "post" simpliciter for mail services; it has none for its use in combination with other words in connection with other services-"Micropost" therefore not confusing-Distinctive and not in breach of any statutory prohibition.