Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Canada Inc.

Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Canada Inc.

The court exercised its discretion to allow Pfizer's Proposed Amendments because they were not bereft of any chance of success and any prejudice to Apotex could be remedied by specific procedural orders and timelines; accordingly Pfizer was granted leave to amend, the earlier bifurcation order was vacated because the amendments expanded and complicated the Start Date Issue, and a comprehensive schedule (discoveries, productions, expert deadlines and trial date) was imposed to mitigate prejudice and ensure readiness for trial.

Citation
2014 FC 876
Parties
Plaintiff; Defendant by Counterclaim: Apotex Inc.; Defendant: Pfizer Canada Inc.; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Warner Lambert Company LLC; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Pfizer Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Patent Litigation (section 8 Damages Under Patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations) / Case Management / Pre Trial (motion to Amend Pleadings)
Outcome
Pfizer's motion to amend granted; Bifurcation Order vacated; comprehensive schedule and limits imposed and trial of all issues fixed to commence April 4, 2016.
Legal Topics
Section 8 Damages, Notice of Compliance Regulations, Pleading Amendments, Bifurcation, Discovery, Election Doctrine, Start Date for Damages
Source Language
English
Patent Law Regulatory Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Section 8 Damages Notice of Compliance Regulations Pleading Amendments Bifurcation +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apotex Inc.

Plaintiff; Defendant by Counterclaim

Pfizer Canada Inc.

Defendant

Warner Lambert Company LLC

Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Pfizer Inc.

Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil Patent Litigation (section 8 Damages Under Patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations) / Case Management / Pre Trial (motion to Amend Pleadings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Pfizer may amend its defence and counterclaim after a bifurcation order
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments expand the bifurcated Start Date Issue and require vacatur of the Bifurcation Order
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendments disclose a defence bereft of any chance of success

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to allow Pfizer's Proposed Amendments because they were not bereft of any chance of success and any prejudice to Apotex could be remedied by specific procedural orders and timelines; accordingly Pfizer was granted leave to amend, the earlier bifurcation order was vacated because the amendments expanded and complicated the Start Date Issue, and a comprehensive schedule (discoveries, productions, expert deadlines and trial date) was imposed to mitigate prejudice and ensure readiness for trial.

Court Disposition

Pfizer's motion to amend granted; Bifurcation Order vacated; comprehensive schedule and limits imposed and trial of all issues fixed to commence April 4, 2016.

Orders

  • Pfizer is granted leave to amend its Further Fresh as Amended Statement of Defence and Counterclaim in the form of the Proposed Amendments attached as Schedule A to the Order.
  • Pfizer shall deliver its Second Further Fresh as Amended Statement of Defence and Counterclaim within 10 days of the date of this Order.