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 1,235

A finding of a settlement agreement is overturned because counsel did not have the authority to bind his client
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 25 2016

The Federal Court of Appeal has overturned the earlier finding that Allergan and Apotex had settled their patent infringement litigation (2015 FC


CIALIS Patent Survives Validity Challenge on Appeal
  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • Canada
  • May 19 2016

Last year we wrote about a trilogy of Federal Court decisions relating to Eli Lilly’s erectile dysfunction (ED) drug CIALIS (tadalafil). While Lilly


Federal Court of Appeal clarifies test for double-patenting
  • Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
  • Canada
  • May 12 2016

On April 20, 2016, the Federal Court of Appeal issued its decision in Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC v Eli Lilly Canada Inc, 2016 FCA 119, a case relating


Patent held to not be infringed based on the construction of the claims
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

Apotex sent a NOA to Shire alleging its patent was invalid and will not be infringed by Apotex. The issues were narrowed for the hearing, where


Recent Ruling Regresses the Federal Court’s Stance on Expert “Blinding” in Canadian Patent Cases
  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • Canada
  • May 16 2016

A recent decision of the Federal Court in Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (2016 FC 344), relating to the drug Gatifloxacin, appears to have


Obviousness double patenting in Canada not so obvious
  • SIM. IP Practice
  • Canada
  • May 16 2016

The recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC v. Eli Lilly Canada Inc. et al.,2016 FCA 119 ("Mylan"), highlights


Pharma in brief - Generic v. Generic PM(NOC) application dismissed for non-infringement
  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • Canada
  • April 21 2015

In a recently published Public Judgment and Reasons, Justice Gleason dismissed Teva Canada Innovation and Teva Pharmaceutical


Pharma in brief - blinded expert evidence favoured: Court dismisses PM(NOC) application for ciclesonide
  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • Canada
  • May 19 2015

Takeda Canada Inc. and Takeda GMBH (Takeda) brought an application under section 6 of the PM(NOC) Regulations for an order prohibiting


The TPP new rights for pharmaceutical patent holders in Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • November 13 2015

The Canadian Government released the official consolidated text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement on Nov., 5, 2015. This follows the


Witness' Evidence Given Less Weight because not Blinded to Patent or Issues; NOC Proceeding Dismissed
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

Apotex sent a NOA in respect of a single patent, alleging obviousness and lack of utility. The Court held that allegation was justified. In