Eli Lilly and Company v. Apotex Inc.

Eli Lilly and Company v. Apotex Inc.

Section 7 limits each party to five experts absent leave, but the court has discretion to increase that number; given the complexity (chemistry, patent and competition issues) Apotex demonstrated a need for up to five additional experts beyond the ten already allowed and was granted leave to call up to 15 expert...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 FC 1041
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Eli Lilly and Company; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Eli Lilly Canada Inc.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): Apotex Inc.; Defendant by Counterclaim: Shionogi & Co. Ltd.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity Counterclaim and Competition Law Allegations / Pre Trial Motion to Increase Number of Expert Witnesses (trial Scheduled)
Outcome
Motion allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Expert Witnesses, Canada Evidence Act S.7, Patent Validity, Patent Infringement, Anticompetitive Conduct
Source Language
english
Patent Law Competition Law Evidence Law Expert Witnesses Canada Evidence Act S.7 Patent Validity Patent Infringement Anticompetitive Conduct

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eli Lilly and Company

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Eli Lilly Canada Inc.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Apotex Inc.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Shionogi & Co. Ltd.

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement, Patent Validity Counterclaim and Competition Law Allegations / Pre Trial Motion to Increase Number of Expert Witnesses (trial Scheduled)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.7 of the Canada Evidence Act limits expert witnesses to five per proceeding or per issue
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to increase the number of expert witnesses beyond court directions
  3. 3 Whether Apotex has demonstrated necessity for up to 15 experts given patent, chemistry and competition issues

Ratio Decidendi

Section 7 limits each party to five experts absent leave, but the court has discretion to increase that number; given the complexity (chemistry, patent and competition issues) Apotex demonstrated a need for up to five additional experts beyond the ten already allowed and was granted leave to call up to 15 expert witnesses, subject to the Trial Judge's discretion to exclude duplicative or unnecessary evidence.

Court Disposition

Motion allowed in part.

Orders

  • Apotex may lead evidence of up to 15 expert witnesses at trial subject to the Trial Judge's discretion to disallow duplicative or unnecessary evidence
  • Costs of the motion are to be determined by the Trial Judge