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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 289

Pleadings amendment re s. 53 allowed trial judge to determine materiality of inventors names
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • December 4 2014

Idenix brought a motion to amend its pleadings. The Prothonotary granted leave to make certain amendments, however denied leave to make certain


Court grants order adding inventor
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • December 4 2014

The Applicant, Dr. Falk Pharma GMBH sought an order pursuant to s. 52 of the Patent Act to vary inventorship on a patent. The Application was


S. 8 case not struck, despite prohibition order having issued in underlying s. 6 proceeding
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • December 4 2014

In this case, the Prothonotary refused to strike a Statement of Claim brought pursuant to s. 8 of the NOC Regulations, and this decision was upheld


New trial ordered and injunction set aside due to a refusal to allow an amendment to the Defence and Counterclaim
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • November 3 2014

The Federal Court of Appeal has heard three related appeals from this proceeding in the Federal Court, and in the result, has sent the matter back


Appeal decision addresses the promise doctrine
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • November 3 2014

This decision relates to two appeals that were heard together and the reasons apply to both. The decision set out the parties’ positions and then


Leave to appeal to SCC granted for a section 8 damages case
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • November 3 2014

The Supreme Court has granted leave in a proceeding pursuant to section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations. Some of the issues to be decided in this


Pleadings amendment to a damages reference not allowed found to be a collateral attack on the final judgment
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • November 3 2014

Apotex moved to file an amended Responding Statement of Issues on a reference pursuant to Rule 153. According to the Court, Apotex wants to argue


Formulation patent allegations of non-infringement, obviousness and lack of utility justified
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • March 2 2015

Servier sought a prohibition order against Apotex in relation to its DIAMICRON MR gliclazide product. The application was dismissed. The patent at


Motion for particulars in action under section 8 denied as not necessary
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 1 2015

Pfizer brought a motion in an action brought pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines(Notice of Compliance) Regulations seeking to strike


Motion for reply evidence granted in part
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 1 2015

This is an appeal from the decision of a Prothonotary, denying leave to file reply evidence in a proceeding pursuant to the Patented Medicines