We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 11-20 of 243

Supreme Court denies Apotex leave to appeal; prohibition order stands

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 30 2014

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) denied Apotex leave to Appeal the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) in a s. 8 case (decision here

Oder of prohibition issues no promise to treatment in humans or reduced side effects was found

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 30 2014

Pfizer’s Canadian Patent No. 2,177,576 for Celebrex has withstood Apotex’s allegations and was found to be valid; therefore the Minister is

The Court grants an innovator standing and the right to be made a party in a judicial Review of the Minister’s Decision relating to the application of the data protection regime

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 26 2014

This was a motion that raised the issue of an innovator’s standing and right to be made a party to a judicial review of the Minister of Health’s

Patent to an “expandable and contractible hose” found to be obvious

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 16 2014

One of the plaintiffs in this patent infringement suit is the inventor of Canadian Patent No. 2,779,882, a patent that claims a compact garden hose

Hypothetical world when multiple s. 8 damages cases held not to reflect size of actual generic market

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 4 2014

In May, 2012, the Federal Court quantified damages owed to Apotex pursuant to s. 8 of the NOC Regulations (decision here, summary here). Similarly

Appeals dismissed from quantification of s. 8 damages

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 4 2014

As discussed above, in May 2012, the Federal Court quantified damages owed to Apotex and Teva pursuant to s. 8 of the NOC Regulations. (Teva decision

Appeal of the re-examination board’s decision dismissed: three claims rejected

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 4 2014

This was an appeal of a decision of a Re-Examination Board cancelling three claims of Newco Tank Corp.’s (“Newco”) Canadian Patent No. 2,421,384 (the

Appeal upholds dismissal of request to amend pleadings due to proximity to trial

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 4 2014

This case concerns an appeal of a motion to amend pleadings in the s. 8 case described above. The motion had originally been brought three months

Court of Appeal upholds decision to deny amendments to statement of defence in Section 8 proceeding Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited, 2014 FCA 65

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 24 2014

This appeal was heard in the context of an action commenced by Teva Canada Limited (“Teva”) seeking compensation from Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. and

Court of Appeal upholds decision awarding Section 8 compensation where sales related to “unauthorized indications” Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada limited, 2014 FCA 69

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 24 2014

Drug: ramipril This was an appeal by Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. and Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH (collectively "Sanofi") from a judgment of the