Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Canada Inc.
- Citation
- 2020 FC 1047
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 10 November 2020
- Posture
- Patent Litigation / Motions Hearing (order and Reasons Delivered Orally; Transcript Filed)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 10 November 2020
- Posture
- Patent Litigation / Motions Hearing (order and Reasons Delivered Orally; Transcript Filed)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court dismissed the two motions after determining they lacked merit and did not satisfy the legal thresholds for the relief sought, and exercised its discretion to refuse the requested relief.
Court disposition
Two motions dismissed; edited transcript to be filed to comply with s.51 Federal Courts Act.
Orders
- The two motions are dismissed.
- The edited transcript of the Order and Reasons shall be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Courts Act, RSC, 1985, c F-7.
02
Material facts
Parties
Allergan Inc.
Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim Counsel: Mr. David Tait; Mr. Sanjaya Mendis; Ms. Kendra LevasseurSandoz Canada Inc.
Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim Counsel: Mr. Warren Sprigings; Ms. Meghan A. Dureen; Ms. Annissa Kwok; Ms. Rae DaddonKissei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
Defendant / Patent OwnerAmounts and remedies
- Motions Dismissed: 2
03
Procedural history
Posture
Patent Litigation / Motions Hearing (order and Reasons Delivered Orally; Transcript Filed)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the two motions should be granted
- 02
Compliance with section 51 of the Federal Courts Act regarding filing of transcript
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant sought the relief set out in its motion record and argued entitlement based on the facts and law advanced in its written and oral submissions.
- Respondent
- Respondent opposed the motions, arguing they lacked merit and failed to meet the applicable legal and procedural thresholds for the relief sought.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
General principles of motions and discretionary relief (case law)
Motions are discretionary and require satisfaction of established legal thresholds before relief is granted.
- 02
Federal Courts Act, RSC 1985, c F-7, s.51
Requirement to file transcript of oral reasons under section 51 of the Federal Courts Act.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court dismissed the two motions after determining they lacked merit and did not satisfy the legal thresholds for the relief sought, and exercised its discretion to refuse the requested relief.
Court disposition
Two motions dismissed; edited transcript to be filed to comply with s.51 Federal Courts Act.
- The two motions are dismissed.
- The edited transcript of the Order and Reasons shall be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Courts Act, RSC, 1985, c F-7.
Source and reliance status
Federal Court · 10 November 2020
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Federal Court
Judgment· 10 November 2020
Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Canada Inc. Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2020-11-10 Neutral citation 2020 FC 1047 File numbers T-2023-18 Decision Content Date: 20201110 Docket: T-2023-18 Citation: 2020 FC 1047 Toronto, Ontario, November 10, 2020 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Barnes BETWEEN: ALLERGAN INC. Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim and SANDOZ CANADA INC. Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim and KISSEI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD. Defendant / Patent Owner
PUBLIC TRANSCRIPT OF ORDER AND REASONS (Confidential Transcript of Order and Reasons issued November 10, 2020) Let the attached edited version of the transcript of my Order and Reasons delivered orally from the bench at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on November 4, 2020, be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Courts Act, RSC, 1985, c F-7. ORDER IN T-2023-18 THIS COURT ORDERS that the two motions are dismissed. "R.L. Barnes" Judge
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-2023-18 STYLE OF CAUSE: ALLERGAN INC. v SANDOZ CANADA INC. AND KISSEI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD. PLACE OF HEARING:
HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE BETWEEN HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA, AND TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: NOVEMBER 4, 2020 PUBLIC TRANSCRIPT OF ORDER AND REASONS: BARNES J. DATED: November 10, 2020 APPEARANCES: Mr. David Tait Mr. Sanjaya Mendis Ms. Kendra Levasseur For The Plaintiff ALLERGAN INC. Mr. Warren Sprigings Ms. Meghan A. Dureen Ms. Annissa Kwok Ms. Rae Daddon For The Defendant SANDOZ CANADA INC. SOLICITORS OF RECORD: McCarthy Tétrault LLP Toronto, ON
FOR THE PLAINTIFF ALLERGAN INC. Sprigings IP Barristers & Solicitors Toronto, ON
FOR THE DEFENDANT SANDOZ CANADA INC.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.