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 1,028

Federal Court of Appeal reinterprets product specificity requirements
  • Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP
  • Canada
  • August 26 2015

On July 17 2015 the Federal Court of Appeal set aside a judgment of the Federal Court that upheld Health Canada's refusal to list Canadian Patent 2


Pharma in brief - non-infringing alternative (NIA) defence may be relevant in patent damages quantification: “could” and “would” an NIA have been used?
  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • Canada
  • August 6 2015

In the liability phase, the Federal Court (FC) found that Canadian Patent No. 1,161,380 (380 Patent) was valid and infringed by Apotex. In the


FCA resurrects non-infringing alternative defence
  • Dimock Stratton LLP
  • Canada
  • August 6 2015

Until now, the standard narrative in Canadian law was that a non-infringing alternative defence was not available to an infringer seeking to limit


Non-infringing alternative is relevant to damages, but not made out on facts
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • August 5 2015

Merck was successful in a patent infringement action. A separate damages reference was held where the Judge awarded lost profits and a reasonable


FCA finds patent should be listed on the patent register for combination drug
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • July 29 2015

In this case, the FCA overturned the Federal Court Decision dismissing Eli Lilly’s application for judicial review of a decision of the Minister of


Federal Court grants prohibition order with respect to a use patent
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • July 29 2015

The Federal Court considered and dismissed allegations relating to double patenting, insufficiency and lack of standing. The Court granted the


Pharma in brief - Federal Court of Appeal relaxes the “perfect match” requirement for patent listing under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations
  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • Canada
  • July 28 2015

The Minister of Health refused to list a patent on the Patent Register in respect of a fixed-dose combination product because it did not contain a


Pharma in brief - Federal Court of Appeal finds that “promised” utility need not be coterminous with the inventive concept
  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • Canada
  • July 27 2015

AstraZeneca Canada Inc. (AstraZeneca) appealed from the decision of Justice Rennie of the Federal Court (reported as AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v


Federal Court of Appeal reinterprets product specificity requirements: patent listing is determined by patent claims construction and not a word match
  • Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP
  • Canada
  • July 23 2015

On July 17, 2015, the Federal Court of Appeal set aside a judgment of the Federal Court that upheld Health Canada’s refusal to list Canadian Patent 2


Mayo on the side? The Canadian Patent Office issues new examination guidelines for medical diagnostic methods
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • July 17 2015

On June 29, 2015, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) issued a long-awaited Practice Notice PN 2015-02("Notice") on the subject of