Merck & Co. v. Apotex Inc.

Merck & Co. v. Apotex Inc.

Apotex was ordered to answer the undertakings listed in appendices 1A, 1B and specified items in 1C within 45 days; the plaintiffs' motion was dismissed with respect to the remaining questions in revised appendix 2 because those questions were properly refused as they required expert opinion or were outside proper discovery scope; accordingly the plaintiffs' examination for discovery of Apotex was closed.

Citation
2003 FCT 664
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): MERCK & CO., INC.; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): MERCK FROSST CANADA & CO.; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): SYNGENTA LIMITED; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): ASTRAZENECA UK LIMITED; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): APOTEX INC.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Patent Litigation Discovery Motion / Motion for Decision on Second Phase of Examination for Discovery
Outcome
Motion partly granted and partly dismissed: Apotex ordered to answer certain undertakings; motion dismissed as to remaining questions; costs in the cause; examination for discovery closed.
Legal Topics
Examination for Discovery, Undertakings, Expert Opinion, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Discovery Examination for Discovery Undertakings Expert Opinion Costs

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MERCK & CO., INC.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

MERCK FROSST CANADA & CO.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

SYNGENTA LIMITED

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

ASTRAZENECA UK LIMITED

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

APOTEX INC.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Patent Litigation Discovery Motion / Motion for Decision on Second Phase of Examination for Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Apotex must answer undertakings listed in confidential appendices 1A and 1B
  2. 2 Whether Apotex must answer the list dated April 7, 2003 and any other lists in appendix 1C
  3. 3 Whether the remaining questions under revised appendix 2 must be answered

Ratio Decidendi

Apotex was ordered to answer the undertakings listed in appendices 1A, 1B and specified items in 1C within 45 days; the plaintiffs' motion was dismissed with respect to the remaining questions in revised appendix 2 because those questions were properly refused as they required expert opinion or were outside proper discovery scope; accordingly the plaintiffs' examination for discovery of Apotex was closed.

Court Disposition

Motion partly granted and partly dismissed: Apotex ordered to answer certain undertakings; motion dismissed as to remaining questions; costs in the cause; examination for discovery closed.

Orders

  • Apotex shall reply in writing to undertakings listed in confidential appendices 1A and 1B within forty-five (45) days of the order.
  • Apotex shall reply in writing to the list dated April 7, 2003 received under appendix 1C within forty-five (45) days of the order.