Macciacchera (Smoothstreams.tv) v. Bell Media Inc.
MARSHALL MACCIACCHERA dba SMOOTHSTREAMS.TV
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
ANTONIO MACCIACCHERA dba SMOOTHSTREAMS.TV
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
ARM HOSTING INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
STAR HOSTING LIMITED (HONG KONG)
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
ROMA WORKS LIMITED (HONG KONG)
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
ROMA WORKS SA (PANAMA)
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
BELL MEDIA INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
ROGERS MEDIA INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS LLC
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP
WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Smart & Biggar LLP

Background:

  • Marshall and Antonio Macciacchera, operating Smoothstreams.tv and associated corporate entities, appealed a decision and sought to represent the corporate appellants themselves in the appeal.

Legal Issues:

  • Whether special circumstances existed allowing the individual appellants (Marshall and Antonio Macciacchera) to represent the corporate appellants in the court proceedings.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

  • The court emphasized that a corporation should normally be represented by a solicitor unless "special circumstances" justify representation by an officer, according to Federal Courts Rules.
  • The Macciaccheras did not provide evidence, such as financial information, proving they couldn't afford legal representation, which is a crucial factor to establish "special circumstances."
  • The court determined that the Macciaccheras failed to meet the high onus of demonstrating special circumstances, particularly the inability to afford a lawyer.

Outcome:

  • The motion by the Macciaccheras to represent the corporate appellants was denied.
  • The court ordered that the corporate appellants must appoint new solicitors of record within 30 days and file a fresh requisition for hearing within the same timeframe after retaining new counsel.
  • No financial terms specified.
Federal Court of Appeal
A-2-23; A-262-22
Intellectual property
Respondent