Dunns Famous International Holdings Inc. v. Devine
Dunn's Famous International Holdings Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Pinto Legal Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Seidman Avocats Inc.
Lawyer(s)

Leonard Seidman

2474234 Ontario Inc, the Estate of the Late Moishe Smith
Law Firm / Organization
Victor Vallance Blais LLP
Lawyer(s)

Stephen Victor

Law Firm / Organization
Burk Law
Lawyer(s)

Ashley Burk

Ina Devine, Stanley Devine, and others
Law Firm / Organization
Independent
Law Firm / Organization
BD Law Offices
Lawyer(s)

Martin Black

Michel Mahfouz, Nabil Mahfouz, Giuseppe Tecci / Mahfouz Defendants and Tecce Defendants
Law Firm / Organization
Famularo Fernandes Levinson
Lawyer(s)

Sergio Famularo

2153742 Ontario Inc. and the Pitfield/Garland Defendants
Law Firm / Organization
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Law Firm / Organization
Stikeman Elliott LLP

- Parties: The plaintiff was Dunn's Famous International Holdings Inc. The defendants were Ina Devine, Stanley Devine, 1222187 Ontario Limited, 1924599 Ontario Inc., 2189944 Ontario Inc., 9702938 Canada Inc., Gray Johnson, 2474234 Ontario Inc., the Estate of the Late Moishe Smith, Tim Long Chang, Ripon Ahmed, Vincent Gobuyan, 10199087 Canada Corporation, and 10199052 Canada Ltd.

- Subject Matter: The plaintiff made claims under the Trademarks Act, 1985 and the Copyright Act, 1985 against various corporate and individual defendants who allegedly infringed its rights under those statutes. On Jan. 19, 2021, the Federal Court granted the plaintiff a default judgment. 2474234 Ontario Inc. and the Estate of Moishe Smith – two defendants subject to the default judgment – moved to set aside the judgment under r. 399(1) of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106.

- Ruling: The court ruled in the plaintiffs’ favour and dismissed the moving defendants’ motion. The court noted that the moving defendants were first served with the amended statement of claim in February and March 2017. The default judgment was issued almost four years later. The court held that the moving defendants failed to show a reasonable explanation for their failure to file a statement of defence.

- Date: The hearing was set on June 20, 2023. The court released its decision on June 28, 2023.

- Venue: This was a federal case before the Federal Court.

- Amount: The court awarded the plaintiff costs of the motion in the lump sum amount of $5000, payable by the moving defendants.

Federal Court
T-1397-16
Intellectual property
$ 5,000
Plaintiff
19 August 2016