Janssen-Ortho Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Health)

Janssen-Ortho Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Health)

The appeal was dismissed because the Court was not persuaded the case was distinguishable from Novartis and was not persuaded that Novartis was manifestly wrong for allegedly overlooking section 4 of the PM(NOC) Regulations; accordingly Novartis and Miller govern and require dismissal with costs to respondents.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 FCA 62
Parties
Appellant: Janssen-Ortho Inc.; Respondent: The Minister of Health; Respondent: The Attorney General of Canada
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal (federal Court of Appeal) / Judgment Delivered From the Bench
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations, Notice of Compliance Process, Statutory Interpretation, Precedent and Stare Decisis
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Intellectual Property Patent Law Regulatory Law Patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations Notice of Compliance Process Statutory Interpretation Precedent and Stare Decisis

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janssen-Ortho Inc.

Appellant

The Minister of Health

Respondent

The Attorney General of Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (federal Court of Appeal) / Judgment Delivered From the Bench

  1. 1 Whether this case is distinguishable from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Health) (2003)
  2. 2 Whether the Novartis decision was manifestly wrong for overlooking s.4 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations
  3. 3 Interpretation and application of s.4 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Court was not persuaded the case was distinguishable from Novartis and was not persuaded that Novartis was manifestly wrong for allegedly overlooking section 4 of the PM(NOC) Regulations; accordingly Novartis and Miller govern and require dismissal with costs to respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to respondents of $2,000 inclusive of disbursements