Canada and the United States are close neighbors. About 300,000 people cross the border each day, and bilateral trade amounts to about $1.6 billion in goods daily. It is not surprising that patent, and other intellectual property disputes, often involve some element of cross-border litigation. The Canadian litigation experience is relatively similar to the American experience. There are, however, some important differences that U.S. attorneys involved in such litigation should be aware of.
… Continue Reading
- Like in the United States, Canada has federal and provincial/state courts. Both can decide patent cases.
- Litigation process and procedure is dictated by the rules of civil
In a judgment pronounced on May 10, 2013, Justice O’Reilly of the Federal Court of Canada, granted Apotex’s claim against Pfizer for section 8 damages under Canada’s Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133. The sole issue before the Court was whether Apotex had a valid claim to damages. The amount is to be determined in a subsequent proceeding. For the full written decision see: Apotex v. Pfizer Canada Inc., 2013 FC 493.
The section 8 claim arises out of a failed prohibition proceeding. In early 2000, Apotex sought approval for its generic version of ZITHROMAX (azithromycin), … Continue Reading
The recent McCarthy Tétrault Technology Law Summit included a panel on “Key Developments in IP Law,” featuring James Skippen, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, WiLAN Inc. and McCarthy Tétrault partners Beth MacDonald, David Gray and Barry Sookman. Paul Armitage, another McCarthy Tétrault partner, moderated the panel.
James Skippen commented on the growing awareness of the value of intellectual property, and patents, in particular. He observed that, instead of being a neglected asset class, patents are playing a more prominent role, and may even, in some circumstances, exceed the value of a company’s other assets.
After describing WiLAN Inc.’s history … Continue Reading