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: 1-10 of 35

B.C. Court dismisses proposed class action against generic manufacturers of fentanyl patch

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 8 2014

On June 20, 2014, Justice Bracken of the British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed a proposed class action against two generic manufacturers of

British Columbia Court of Appeal decertifies pharmaceutical class action

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 13 2014

In Wakelam v. Wyeth Consumer Healthcare Wyeth Soins de Sante Inc., 2014 BCCA 36, the British Columbia Court of Appeal overruled a decision

Court of Appeal clarifies - for utility the promise of the patent must be "clear and unambiguous"

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • August 21 2013

On July 24, 2013, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) issued its decision in Apotex Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis, overturning a Federal Court decision

Supreme Court issues clear warning of need to respect the "patent bargain"

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • November 12 2012

On Thursday, November 8, 2012, a unanimous Supreme Court of Canada issued a decision with significant implications for those wishing to obtain or enforce Canadian patent rights

Continuation of the "first to file" rule in Québec?

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 14 2012

A recent decision from the Québec Superior Court has stated that the “first to file” rule continues to dictate the carriage of class actions within that province (except when it is obvious that the best interests of the putative class members are not the counsel’s priority), until such time as the Québec Court of Appeal changes the status quo

Court of Appeal for Ontario clarifies the duty of care test for cases of regulatory negligence

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 17 2012

In the recent decision in Taylor v. Canada (Attorney General), the Court of Appeal for Ontario addressed the requirements for a plaintiff to establish sufficient proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant in a claim brought against a governmental body for regulatory negligence

Ontario Superior Court of Justice releases class action trial decision

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 29 2012

After hearing 138 days of evidence, allowing for 4 months of written submissions and approximately 8 days of oral closing submissions in a trial of the common issues in Andersen v. St. Jude Medical Inc., a class action brought on behalf of a class of persons implanted with allegedly defective heart valves, Justice Lax of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, on Tuesday, released a 222 page decision dismissing the action

Federal Court prevents Minister of Health from allowing sale of generic version of immunosuppressive drug MMF

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • August 24 2011

In an application pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, Hoffman-La Roche sought an order preventing the Minister of Health from issuing a notice of compliance to Apotex for the drug mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), an immunosuppressive drug used primarily in organ transplants, until after the expiry of Canadian Patent No. 1,333,285

Federal Court of Appeal confirms that Eli Lilly's patent to atomoxetine is invalid for lack of utility

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • August 15 2011

The Federal Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Eli Lilly and Company v Teva Canada Ltd, confirming the trial court’s finding that Canadian Patent No. 2,209,735 (the 735 patent), which claims a new use for an old medicine that has long been in the public domain (the use of atomoxetine for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in three of its manifestations among all age groups), is invalid

Federal Court of Appeal refuses to set aside prohibition order even though untrue material allegations had been made in the invalid patent at issue

  • Stikeman Elliott LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 15 2011

A recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal represents a blow to generic pharmaceutical companies in their quest to seek compensation for the period of time that they were precluded from entering the market with a generic version of a drug as a result of an invalid patent and lengthy proceedings under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (NOC Regulations