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 188

Generics v Lundbeck - distinguishing the sufficiency requirements for product and process claims
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • May 19 2008

In Generics v Lundbeck, the Court of Appeal provided important guidance on the judgment of the House of Lords in Biogen v Medeva regarding the scope of protection to which an inventor is entitled and the enabling disclosure the specification must provide to support the claims in the patent


Implemention of “Bolar” in the EU
  • Gowling WLG
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • October 31 2007

In Europe, Directive 200427EC (amending Directive 200183EC) introduced into European Union legislation for the first time an exemption from patent infringement for conducting certain developmental work pre-patent expiry (the EU ‘Bolar’ exemption


Patent misuse in the pharmaceutical industry: developments in US & EU
  • Gowling WLG
  • European Union, USA
  • October 31 2007

The pharmaceutical industry has been scrutinised closely by competition authorities and courts in the US and Europe


Apotex defeats French hypertension drug patent
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • October 31 2007

The High Court found that a patent for a drug used to treat hypertension was infringed by Apotex’s generic equivalent


Pfizer v Ranbaxy; 55.2 proceeding; October 5, 2007 - atorvastatin
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • October 25 2007

The trial judge granted prohibition in respect of one patent claiming a novel crystalline form of atorvastatin (the "crystalline form patent") and denied prohibition in respect of another patent claiming a novel process for making atorvastatin (the "process patent"


Apotex v. Canada (Minister of Health) & Servier
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • May 8 2008

In this proceeding, Apotex sought approval for its perindopril products on the basis of a bioavailability comparison to only the 8mg strength of the innovator's drug


Recent cases
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • August 1 2008

The Court of Appeal overturned the motions judge's decision striking the notice of appearance


PMPRB issues discussion paper on options to address the Federal Court decision in LEO Pharma
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • February 6 2008

The Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) has issued a discussion paper outlining a series of options to address the implications of the Federal Court of Canada decision in the LEO Pharma case


Federal court affirms standing for innovative drug manufacturer
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • July 23 2014

What rights do innovative drug manufacturers have in situations where generics challenge certain Health Canada decisions but do not name the


Data protection: defining innovative drug in Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • April 22 2013

Canada amended its Data Protection Regulations in 2006 to provide protection for innovative drugs in a second attempt to implement Canada's 1994