Representative Work

---

Business dealings sometimes lead to legal disputes. While we work with our clients to avoid litigation, including through negotiation, arbitration or mediation, contentious matters sometimes result in legal actions.

When they do, we are vigorous in advancing our clients' interests, and proceeding to court if necessary.

We have experience in various contractual and shareholder disputes, builder's liens, construction disputes, environmental litigation, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty matters, as well as bankruptcy, insolvency and collection work.

From patent holders suing to enforce their patent rights to parties seeking damages from misuse of their confidential information, intellectual property litigation covers both statutory and non-statutory types of intellectual property protection.

Federal legislation governs rights under patent, trademark and copyright law. Other types of intellectual property rights, including the protection of confidential information, exist at common law.

Our experience includes litigating all of these areas of intellectual property law, up to and including trial. 

Trademarks are words, logos, designs or a combination of these elements which serve to distinguish the wares or services of one person or organization from other competitors in the marketplace.

A registered trademark provides that only the registered owner of the trademark, or those licensed by the registered owner, may use the trademark in Canada.

Shaun Cody is a registered Trademark Agent and can work with business owners in filing trademark applications and pursuing trademark protection from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office.

Patents serve to protect inventions, by giving the patent owner (or someone licensed by the patent owner) the exclusive right to make, use or sell the patented invention within Canada for a set period of time. Patent rights protect the way in which a device or method works or functions. Unlike trademark rights, patent rights cannot be extended after the initial term.

Patent registrations serve to prevent competitors from taking the idea and manufacturing, using or selling products using the subject matter of the patent.

We work with a number of patent agents to assist clients in pursuing patent protection for their idea. 

Very early in his legal career, Shaun argued what has become one of Alberta's leading cases on Anton Piller injunctions.  

See: Capitanescu et al. v. Universal Weld Overlays Inc. et al., (1996), 141 D.L.R. (4th) 751, 71 C.P.R. (3d) 37 (Alta. Q.B.). 

Shaun successfully opposed attempts to add further defendants years after environmental contamination was first discovered.  

See Rosenich v. Welke, 2003 ABQB 876 (CanLII) (Alta. Q.B.) 

Shaun obtained damages for defamation and passing off in respect of a domain name confusingly similar to his client's website. See:  Inform Cycle Ltd. v. Draper,(2008), 67 C.P.R. (4th) 151, 438 A.R. 80 (Alta. Q.B.).  

Shaun obtained what was then one of the largest defamation awards in Alberta for false allegations of patent infringement repeated by the Defendants. Aggravated damages were also received for the multiple instances of defamation, which the court found were motivated by malice against a business competitor. See: ​Universal Weld Overlays Inc. v. Shaben, 2001 ABQB 1009.

Shaun successfully defended his clients against allegations of patent infringement   in respect of welding technology. See Capitanescu et al. v. Universal Weld Overlays Inc. et al. [1997]   A.J. No. 740 75 C.P.R. (3d) 145 (Alta. Q.B.).

Shaun, along with co-counsel, successfully defended his clients from allegations of   patent infringement in relation to three separate patents for downhole oil   tools.  Shaun was also successful in obtaining a declaration that one of the patents was invalid, the independent claim of another was invalid, and that allegations of infringement made to third parties were false and misleading. See: Excalibre Oil Tools Ltd v. Advantage Products   Inc., 2016 FC 1279 (CanLII)

ARAM Systems Ltd. v. NovAtel Inc. (2008), ABQB 441; (2009) ABCA 262; leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed January 28, 2010) was groundbreaking in that it marked the first time a Canadian Court decided the issue of inventorship of a US patent and other pending patent applications, including a Canadian patent application utilizing American law of derivation. Shaun was involved in all levels of the case, from trial to the Supreme Court of Canada written submissions. More recently, Shaun has been involved disputes over ownership of the subject matter of patent applications and academic works.  

Janus Capital et. al. v. Petro Motion et al. (2015) [unreported]  Shaun successfully applied for a security for costs order in a matter involving disputes as to ownership of an invention for which patent protection was sought. QB Proceedings-CVQ15JANUS1.