CITATION: Brand Name Marketing Inc. v. Rogers Communications Inc., 2016 ONSC 4567
COURT FILE NO.: 06-CL-6732
DATE: 20171106
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
BRAND NAME MARKETING INC.
Plaintiff
– and –
ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC., ROGERS WIRELESS INC./ROGERS SANS-FIL INC. and RETHINK BREAST CANCER
Defendants
Christopher J. Cosgriffe and Ryan R. Watkins, for the Plaintiff
Jeffrey Simpson and Mark Wiffen, for the Defendants
HEARD: May 16,17, 24, 25 and 26, 2016, September 26, 27 and 28, 2016 and March 21, 2017
Wilton-Siegel J.
[1] In this action, Brand Name Marketing Inc. (the “plaintiff”) seeks damages from Rogers Communications Inc. (“RCI”) and Rogers Wireless Inc. (“RWI”, and collectively with RCI, the “defendant” or “Rogers”) for breach of a non-disclosure agreement and breach of confidence in respect of information, data and analysis provided to Rogers in respect of a marketing concept referred to as the “Pink Phone program”.
The Parties
[2] Brand Name Marketing Inc. (“BNMI”), a predecessor of the plaintiff, was incorporated under the laws of Canada on May 13, 2002. The initial shareholders of BNMI were David Kolber (“Kolber”), David Newton (“Newton”) and Mitch Valentik (“Valentik”).
[3] Broadplay Inc. (“Broadplay “) is a corporation that was also incorporated under the laws of Canada on May 16, 2002. The original shareholders of Broadplay were also Kolber, Newton and Valentik.
[4] 62330415 Canada Inc. (“623”) was a corporation that was also incorporated under the laws of Canada. On October 25,