Apotex Inc. v. Bayer AG
The Prothonotary's order was set aside because it was founded on an incorrect legal principle and a misapprehension of the facts; an appellate court will grant leave to file reply evidence where the lower tribunal's decision on that procedural point is legally wrong or factually mistaken, and Justice Gibson properly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2002 FCA 510
- Parties
- Appellant: Apotex Inc.; Respondents: Bayer AG and Bayer Inc.; Respondent: The Minister of Health
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 18 December 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order (leave to File Reply Evidence)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière set aside; Order of Justice Gibson affirmed granting Bayer leave to file reply evidence and permitting Apotex to file evidence in reply at its discretion; costs awarded throughout.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to File Evidence, Standard of Review, Interlocutory Orders, Reply Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Apotex Inc.
Appellant
Bayer AG and Bayer Inc.
Respondents
The Minister of Health
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order (leave to File Reply Evidence)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Prothonotary applied the correct legal principle in refusing leave to file reply evidence
- 2 Whether Justice Gibson correctly reversed the Prothonotary for applying a wrong principle of law and for a misapprehension of the facts
- 3 Whether leave to file reply evidence should be granted and whether the responding party may be permitted to file further reply evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The Prothonotary's order was set aside because it was founded on an incorrect legal principle and a misapprehension of the facts; an appellate court will grant leave to file reply evidence where the lower tribunal's decision on that procedural point is legally wrong or factually mistaken, and Justice Gibson properly exercised appellate review to permit Bayer to file reply evidence and to allow Apotex, at its discretion, to file evidence in reply.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière set aside; Order of Justice Gibson affirmed granting Bayer leave to file reply evidence and permitting Apotex to file evidence in reply at its discretion; costs awarded throughout.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs throughout.
- Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière dated June 11, 2002 set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Apotex Inc. v. Bayer AG Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-12-18 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 510 File numbers A-639-02 Decision Content Date: 20021218 Docket: A-639-02 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 510 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. STONE J.A. NOËL J.A BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant (Respondent) and BAYER AG and BAYER INC. Respondents (Applicants) and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH Respondent (Respondent) Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on December 18, 2002. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on December 18, 2002. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: RICHARD C.J. Date: 20021218 Docket: A-639-02 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 510 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. STONE J.A. NOËL J.A BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant (Respondent) and BAYER AG and BAYER INC. Respondents (Applicants) and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH Respondent (Respondent) REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on December 18, 2002.) RICHARD C.J. [1] This is an appeal of an Order of Justice Gibson dated November 14, 2002, whereby Justice Gibson set aside the Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière dated June 11, 2002 and granted leave to the respondents, Bayer AG and Bayer Inc. ("Bayer"), to file reply evidence. Justice Gibson also granted leave to Apotex Inc., at its discretion, to file evidence in reply to the reply evidence of Bayer. [2] Justice Gibson correctly set out the applicable standard of review. He then proceeded to reverse the decision of the Prothonotary on the grounds that it was based on a wrong principle of law and a misapprehension of the facts. [3] Accordingly, this appeal will be dismissed with costs throughout. "J. Richard" Chief Justice FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-639-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: APOTEX INC. v. BAYER AG and BAYER INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: December 18, 2002 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: (RICHARD C.J., STONE J.A. & NOËL J.A.) RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY RICHARD C.J. APPEARANCES: Mr. Andrew R. Brodkin FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Neil R. Belmore FOR THE RESPONDENTS Mr. Kenneth Clark SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Goodmans LLP FOR THE APPELLANT Toronto, Ontario Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP FOR THE RESPONDENTS Toronto, Ontario Mr. Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada (THE MINISTER OF HEALTH) Ottawa, Ontario