Fortier 2000 Ltée v. Matière

Fortier 2000 Ltée v. Matière

The court ruled that factual questions, even if technical and within the deponent's common knowledge, must be answered at discovery, but questions that require interpretation of patent claims, assessment of inventive step or novelty, or are hypothetical should not be answered and are matters for the court and expert evidence; accordingly specific categories and questions were ordered answered or refused and a timetable for answers and re-examination was set.

Citation
2003 FC 1007
Parties
Plaintiff; Defendant to Counterclaim: Fortier 2000 Ltée; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Marcel Matière; Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Béton Provincial Ltée
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement; Discovery Motion / Examination for Discovery Objections; Pre Trial Motions
Outcome
Mixed: certain discovery questions ordered answered; others refused; timetable set for answers and re-examination; no costs awarded
Legal Topics
Claim Construction, Invalidity, Prior Art, Examination for Discovery, Undertakings
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Discovery Claim Construction Invalidity Prior Art Examination for Discovery +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fortier 2000 Ltée

Plaintiff; Defendant to Counterclaim

Marcel Matière

Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Béton Provincial Ltée

Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement; Discovery Motion / Examination for Discovery Objections; Pre Trial Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether specific discovery questions and undertakings must be answered
  2. 2 Whether questions requiring patent claim interpretation must be answered in discovery
  3. 3 Whether factual-technical questions within common knowledge must be answered

Ratio Decidendi

The court ruled that factual questions, even if technical and within the deponent's common knowledge, must be answered at discovery, but questions that require interpretation of patent claims, assessment of inventive step or novelty, or are hypothetical should not be answered and are matters for the court and expert evidence; accordingly specific categories and questions were ordered answered or refused and a timetable for answers and re-examination was set.

Court Disposition

Mixed: certain discovery questions ordered answered; others refused; timetable set for answers and re-examination; no costs awarded

Orders

  • Undertakings 19 and 20 in category 3 must be answered; undertaking 21 and the undertakings in category 4 need not be answered.
  • Questions in category 6, category 8, the two questions in category 9 and the questions in category 10 (as described) need not be answered because they require claim interpretation, expert assessment, or are inappropriate.