Krouse v. Chrysler Canada, LTD
Ontario Court of Appeals
7 1 O.R. (2d) 225, 40 D.L.R. (3d) 15, 13 C.P.R. (2d) 28 (1973)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Chrysler Canada, Ltd. (Chrysler) (defendant) was an auto manufacturer. In 1969, Chrysler distributed a device called the Spotter, which was intended to advertise the Chrysler brand to Canadian football fans. Fans could use the Spotter during football games to read information about players and their teams. The Spotter contained photos of Chrysler’s 1970 models and also contained photos of players. Bob Krouse (plaintiff) played in the Canadian Football League as number 14 for the Hamilton Tiger-Cats Football Club (the team). The Spotter contained a dramatic photo of Krouse colliding with another player. The players’ faces were obscured, but the photo clearly depicted Krouse’s number 14 jersey, and fans of the team would recognize that the image depicted Krouse. The team’s owners allowed the photo to be taken for purposes of publicizing the team, and Krouse’s employment contract contained an agreement that the team had the exclusive right to such photos. Krouse sued Chrysler in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, arguing that the unauthorized use of his image in the Spotter implied that he endorsed the Chrysler brand, and that Chrysler was trespassing on his right to profit from advertising that used his image. Krouse did not argue that the inclusion of his photo in the Spotter constituted defamation. The trial court found for Krouse and awarded him $1,000 and court costs. Chrysler appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Estey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.