ARTICLE
24 February 2026

Registrar-initiated Trademark Expungement Proceedings Are "Pruning The Deadwood

OW
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala LLP

Contributor

Oyen Wiggs LLP is a Vancouver-based independent intellectual property boutique law firm in Canada. We are experienced patent lawyers with a variety of technical backgrounds that provide us with the insight to help our clients define and protect their innovations. Through our wide-reaching network of foreign associates, we advance our clients’ interests around the world.
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office's (CIPO) 2025 pilot project on Registrar-initiated trademark registration...
Canada Intellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala’s articles from Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala LLP are most popular:
  • with Inhouse Counsel
  • with readers working within the Oil & Gas industries

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office's (CIPO) 2025 pilot project on Registrar-initiated trademark registration expungement has begun to result in the expungement of trademark registrations, even when the owner responds.

Under Section 45 of the Trademarks Act, any person may request that the Registrar of Trademarks give notice to a registered trademark owner, requiring the owner to provide evidence of use of the trademark within the preceding three-year period. Failure to establish use may result in the expungement of the registration. Section 45 also permits the Registrar to give the same notice on his or her own initiative, although historically the Registrar did not exercise this power.

However, starting in January 2025, the Registrar began issuing a limited number of notices on their own initiative. Of the notices issued in January, 54% of them resulted in expungement of the registration due to failure of the owner to respond to the notice. In the fall of 2025, decisions on cases where the owner did file evidence started to be released. Two such decisions have resulted in expungement.

In Registrar of Trademarks v INFOPRO DIGITAL TRADE SHOWS, the submitted evidence did not establish use because it related only to trade shows held outside of Canada. In Registrar of Trademarks v Dion Neckwear Ltd, the submitted evidence did not establish use because it did not provide evidence of transfers in the normal course of trade (e.g. invoices).

Registered trademark owners are reminded that they need to regularly use their registered trademarks or risk losing the registrations.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More