snIP/ITs Insights on Canadian Technology and Intellectual Property Law

Monthly Archives: August 2014

SAGD Patents and Applications in Canada

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patents

INTRODUCTION

In 1979, Dr. Robert Butler and his research team filed a Canadian patent application for the oil recovery technology known as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (“SAGD”).  Over thirty years later, SAGD technology has become a formative oil-recovery process, with over two hundred patent applications filed in Canada relating to SAGD technology.

SAGD operations have increased primarily due to its potential to enhance bitumen recovery.[1]  Patent applications have been filed in respect of many aspects of SAGD technology, including the orientation of the wells, the composition of the wells themselves, and the infrastructure that is required to … Continue Reading

B.C. Supreme Court Breathes Life Into New Breed of Potential Pharma-Related Class Action Whereby Innovator Profits Are At Risk

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patents

In Canada, innovator drug companies can protect their market exclusivity from generic copycats by asserting patents against the generic manufacturer in litigation under the PM(NOC) Regulations. Until now, the consequences of losing PM(NOC) litigation was the potential payment of damages to the generic whose market access was delayed by the litigation. These so-called “section 8 damages” are limited to the actual loss suffered by the generic during that specific period of delay. Public policy is such that the profits earned by the innovator during that period cannot, however, be disgorged pursuant to section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations.… Continue Reading

Third Party’s Right to Use Official Mark in a Domain Name Upheld: BC Court of Appeal Rejects ICBC’s Claim of Trade-mark Infringement

Posted in Intellectual Property, Trade-marks

Third Party’s Right to Use Official Mark in a Domain Name Upheld: BC Court of Appeal Rejects ICBC’s Claim of Trade-mark Infringement  

On July 22, 2014, the B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed the claim of B.C.’s provincial auto insurer, the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC), that a personal injury lawyer’s registration and use of domain names incorporating its official mark “ICBC” violated the Canadian Trade-Marks Act. 

In Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v. Stainton Ventures Ltd., 2014 BCCA 296 the Court held that the domain names <icbcadvice.ca> and <icbcadvice.com> did not infringe ICBC’s rights as internet users will … Continue Reading

The Enforcement Begins: Highlights of the CRTC FAQ Updates on CASL

Posted in Anti-Spam

CASL came into effect on July 1, 2014, including the provisions for sending commercial electronic messages (“CEM”) (section 6) and installing computer programs (section 8).   Since July 1, 2014, it is reported that the CRTC has received more than 1,000 complaints.  Hence, awareness of this new law is spreading quickly, and as such so should attempts by organizations to become compliant.

The CRTC FAQs on Canada’s new Anti-Spam Legislation (“CASL”) were updated on July 4, 2014.  We covered the revisions made to the FAQs in May 2014 in a previous blog post.  The updated FAQs … Continue Reading

Intrusion Upon Seclusion Part 2: Implications for Businesses Across Canada

Posted in Privacy

Recently, my colleagues Sean Griffin and Ann-Elisabeth Simard considered the Evans v Bank of Nova Scotia (“Evans”) decision wherein the Ontario Supreme Court (the “Court”) certified a class action proceeding for allegations concerning a breach of privacy rights through the tort of intrusion upon seclusion first set out in Jones v Tsige (“Jones”).  You can access his blog here.

Evans has set a precedent for the low threshold required to be met for certification in class actions concerning breaches of information privacy. In this blog, we will canvass the implications of the EvansContinue Reading

Beware Hubris – Janssen’s infringement of AbbVie’s patent gets enjoined by the Federal Court

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patents

Justice Roger T. Hughes of the Federal Court of Canada granted AbbVie the first-ever limited injunction against a branded pharmaceutical company infringing a branded competitor’s patent.  The injunction followed Justice Hughes’ earlier finding that AbbVie’s patent was valid and infringed by Janssen through the promoting, offering for sale, and selling in Canada of Janssen’s biologic product, Stelara, for the treatment of psoriasis.

This injunction is important because it affirms that:

  1.  A permanent injunction will normally follow a finding that a patent is valid and infringed.
  2.  The three-part RJR Macdonald test for interlocutory injunctions does not apply in the case of
Continue Reading