caesar cocktail造句

• In the court reports, judges referred to all of these products collectively as Caesar Cocktail.
• In 1986, FBI Foods Ltd . purchased Caesar Canning s assets and continued to sell Caesar Cocktail.
• In addition to his musical work, Curtola was a business entrepreneur, marketing a brand of tomato clam Caesar cocktail called SeaCzar for three years.
• Justice Newbury agreed with Cadbury-Schweppes and therefore ordered FBI Foods Ltd . to pay a higher level of damages and enjoined them from using the recipe to produce Caesar Cocktail.
• Finally, Justice Huddart ruled that Caesar Canning and FBI Foods Ltd . had misused the information because they used it to produce Caesar Cocktail, a purpose for which they had not been given the information.
• First, he agreed with Huddart J . that Cadbury-Schweppes s delay in seeking an injunction until after FBI Foods Ltd . had invested considerably in the production of Caesar Cocktail would make an injunction unfair.
• Cadbury-Schweppes did not take immediate action against FBI Foods Ltd . or Caesar Canning because they believed that neither company had breached the licensing agreement, given that no clam juice was used to produce Caesar Cocktail.
• FBI Foods Ltd . appealed the decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing that the injunction and award of the first 12 months of profits from Caesar Cocktail overcompensated Cadbury-Schweppes.
• In this case, Justice Binnie felt that, for several reasons, it would not be just to impose an injunction on FBI Foods Ltd . preventing them from producing Caesar Cocktail using the recipe based on the Clamato recipe.
• They claimed that any losses suffered by Cadbury-Schweppes were due to Cadbury-Schweppes s own cancellation of the licensing agreement, not from competition from Caesar Cocktail, and that therefore they should not have to provide any compensation.
• She ruled that damages should be assessed based on the profits that Cadbury-Schweppes would have made had all sales of Caesar Cocktail for the first 12 months after it entered the market been made by Cadbury-Schweppes and not Caesar Canning.
• She ruled that, because Cadbury-Schweppes could not prove they had lost money due to the competition, FBI Foods, Ltd . should only be required to compensate Cadbury-Schweppes for money Caesar Canning saved by not having to develop its own recipe for Caesar Cocktail.
• Justice Huddart did not order FBI Foods Ltd . to give all of the profits it made from Caesar Cocktail to Cadbury-Schweppes because Cadbury-Schweppes had not requested such a remedy until after she had ruled that FBI Foods Ltd . and Caesar Canning had misused their recipe.
• Given that not everyone who purchased Caesar Cocktail during the 12-month period would have purchased Clamato instead, had Caesar Cocktail not been on the market, he ruled that this amount should not be based solely on the amount of Caesar Cocktail sold in the 12-month period.
• Given that not everyone who purchased Caesar Cocktail during the 12-month period would have purchased Clamato instead, had Caesar Cocktail not been on the market, he ruled that this amount should not be based solely on the amount of Caesar Cocktail sold in the 12-month period.
• Given that not everyone who purchased Caesar Cocktail during the 12-month period would have purchased Clamato instead, had Caesar Cocktail not been on the market, he ruled that this amount should not be based solely on the amount of Caesar Cocktail sold in the 12-month period.