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 109

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

Amendments alleging contributory infringement not allowed

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 4 2012

Nycomed appealed the decision of the Prothonotary, refusing to allow amendments to its Counterclaim that Apotex and Novopharm are liable for contributory infringement, and that they knew or ought to have known that their generic version would be used in an infringing manner

Entitlement to Section 8 damages determined

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 28 2012

The trial was divided into two parts, with AstraZeneca’s challenges relating to the validity of section 8 being argued before the Trial Judge and a second judge seized with many of the same validity challenges in two unrelated matters

Court maintains claim against foreign patentee under s. 8 of the NOC Regulations

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • December 15 2010

In this action brought pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, the defendants brought a motion to have the action dismissed as against the foreign defendants

Intellectual property weekly abstracts bulletin

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 17 2013

Although the Court of Appeal had split 2-1, the Supreme Court refused Takeda's application for leave as well as the motion to intervene by Canada's

Parties added to infringement counterclaim

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 25 2012

Apotex is claiming damages pursuant to s.8 of the Notice of Compliance Regulations in Ontario Court, and Abbott and Takeda allege that Apotex infringes certain claims for of two patents

Eli Lilly Canada v. Novopharm Limited

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 15 2010

On August 2, 2010, we reported the Federal Court of Appeal's decision between Eli Lilly and Novopharm concerning olanzapine

Impeachment action dismissed as against one patent due to mootness

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 20 2012

After an unsuccessful NOC proceeding, Apotex started an impeachment action, alleging that its Apo-quinapril product will not infringe two patents and also seeking to invalidate the patents

NOC Proceedings

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • November 3 2010

Merck applied for a patent containing a number of compounds including dorzolamide, which was named as an especially preferred compound