DBC Marine Safety Systems Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents)
Where an applicant fails to respond to a requisition and the application is not reinstated within the one-year period provided by statute, the application is abandoned as a matter of law and there is no discretionary decision for the court to review.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2008 FCA 256
- Parties
- Appellant: DBC Marine Safety Systems Ltd.; Respondent: The Commissioner of Patents; Respondent: The Attorney General of Canada
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 September 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Decision of the Federal Court of Appeal on Appeal From Federal Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Abandonment of Patent Application, Reinstatement of Patent Application, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review
- 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
DBC Marine Safety Systems Ltd.
Appellant
The Commissioner of Patents
Respondent
The Attorney General of Canada
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision of the Federal Court of Appeal on Appeal From Federal Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to respond to a requisition and failure to reinstate within the one-year period results in automatic abandonment of the patent application as a matter of law
- 2 Whether the consequence of abandonment is a discretionary decision reviewable by the court
Ratio Decidendi
Where an applicant fails to respond to a requisition and the application is not reinstated within the one-year period provided by statute, the application is abandoned as a matter of law and there is no discretionary decision for the court to review.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
DBC Marine Safety Systems Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2008-09-09 Neutral citation 2008 FCA 256 File numbers A-558-07 Decision Content Date: 20080909 Docket: A-558-07 Citation: 2008 FCA 256 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. SEXTON J.A. BLAIS J.A. BETWEEN: DBC MARINE SAFETY SYSTEMS LTD. Appellant and THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondents Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2008. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2008. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: RICHARD C.J. Date: 20080909 Docket: A-558-07 Citation: 2008 FCA 256 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. SEXTON J.A. BLAIS J.A. BETWEEN: DBC MARINE SAFETY SYSTEMS LTD. Appellant and THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondents REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2008) RICHARD C.J. [1] We are all of the view that this appeal should be dismissed. [2] The regime for patent applications is firmly established by the Patent Act and the Patent Rules. Together, the various legislative provisions set out a complete code governing the duties of an applicant for a patent, the consequences of a failure to comply with those duties, and the steps that may be taken to avoid those consequences. [3] We agree with Mr. Justice Mosley’s conclusion at paragraph 34 of his Reasons for Judgment (2007 FC 1142). Thus, where an applicant fails to respond to a requisition and the application is not reinstated within the year provided to rectify the situation, the patent application is abandoned as a matter of law. There is no discretionary decision which is reviewable by the Court. [4] Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. "J. Richard" Chief Justice FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-558-07 APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE RICHARD MOSLEY DATED NOVEMBER 5, 2007, DOCKET NO. (T-1667-06) STYLE OF CAUSE: DBC MARINE SAFETY SYSTEMS LTD. v. THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: September 9, 2008 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: (RICHARD C.J., SEXTON J.A. & BLAIS J.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: RICHARD C.J. APPEARANCES: Dennis Leung and Joy Mauthe FOR THE APPELLANT Rick Woyiwada FOR THE RESPONDENTS SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ridout & Maybee LLP FOR THE APPELLANT John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENTS