Canada Case Law

Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Novartis AG

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not commit a reversible error: patients are a relevant class of consumers for the confusion analysis in this context, the surrounding circumstances (including oral communication and repackaging practices) supported a finding of likelihood of confusion between BEOVU and BYOOVIZ, passing off was established, and injunctive relief plus nominal damages ($20,000) were appropriate; the appeals and cross-appeals were dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Likelihood of confusion
• Consumer attitude in confusion analysis
• S.6(5) surrounding circumstances
• Injunctive relief
• Nominal damages
• Accounting of profits

Read case analysis

Callahan v. MNP Ltd., Liquidator of 0081092 B.C. Ltd.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed a stay application pending appeal in a liquidation sale dispute, finding only arguable merit on bid compliance but no irreparable harm and no balance of convenience.

• Stay of proceedings
• Court‑supervised sale process
• Sealed bid compliance
• Conditions precedent in bids
• Irreparable harm
• Balance of convenience

Read case analysis

Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. v. Canada (Health)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court struck Boehringer’s judicial review application for lack of standing, finding the alleged impacts were indirect, commercial or economic.

• Standing
• Judicial review
• Notice of compliance (noc)
• Patented medicines (notice of compliance) regulations
• Patient safety
• Costs

Read case analysis

Viking Air Ltd. v. Aevex Aerospace, LLC

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed the claim against Ikhana Aircraft Canada, Inc. and stayed the proceedings against Ikhana Group, LLC and Aevex Aerospace, LLC in favour of Southern California.

• Territorial competence
• Forum selection clause
• Forum non conveniens
• Breach of contract
• Misappropriation of confidential information/trade secrets
• Conversion

Read case analysis

Bell Media Inc. v. Macciacchera (Smoothstreams.tv)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court fixed lump sum costs of $94,906.19 against Antonio Macciacchera after contempt findings, and granted limited confidentiality over parts of the cost record.

• Costs assessment
• Anton piller order
• Search and seizure
• Disclosure obligations
• Lump sum costs
• Confidentiality

Read case analysis

Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. v. Janssen Inc.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a Rule 220 motion seeking an advance ruling on a section 8 PM(NOC) damages issue in the Dr. Reddy’s and Janssen litigation.

• Section 7 statutory stay
• Section 8 damages
• But-for hypothetical market
• Rule 220 preliminary question
• Patented medicines (notice of compliance) regulations
• Section-8-damages

Read case analysis

Bauer Hockey Ltd. v. Sport Maska Inc. (CCM Hockey)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court's conclusion that the disputed claims were invalid for obviousness was upheld because the inventive gap — converting a two-piece quarter to a one-piece quarter — would have been bridged by a person skilled in the art using routine pattern-making techniques and the common general knowledge; commercial considerations (directional material waste and subsequent adoption of non-directional materials) plausibly explained prior non-adoption, and appellate review found no palpable and overriding error in the Federal Court's factual findings or application of the Apotex framework.

Source excerpt

• Obviousness
• Claim construction
• Prosecution history estoppel (s.53.1)
• Standard of review
• Validity

Read case analysis

Fresenius Kabi Canada Ltd. v. Canada (Health)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court found Health Canada’s refusal to issue an NOC unreasonable and granted mandamus, holding AbbVie had given effective consent under s. 7(2).

• Patented medicines (notice of compliance) regulations s.7(2) consent
• Biosimilar market entry
• Mandamus to compel administrative action
• Statutory interpretation
• Patented-medicines-notice-of-compliance-regulations
• Biosimilar-market-entry

Read case analysis

Sandhu Singh Hamdard Trust v. Navsun Holdings Ltd.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court erred by (1) applying a confusion test instead of the s.19 identical-mark test, (2) failing to consider all s.6(5) factors when assessing confusion under s.20 and passing off, and (3) applying the wrong test for depreciation of goodwill under s.22; accordingly findings of passing off for Navsun's original logo and the dismissal of Hamdard Trust's claims in respect of Navsun's modified logo under ss.19, 20 and 22 are set aside, damages for copyright infringement are varied to $5,000, and the remaining trademark and passing off issues are remitted to the Federal Court for rede…

Source excerpt

• Infringement
• Depreciation of goodwill
• Section 19 trademarks act
• Section 20 trademarks act
• Section 22 trademarks act
• Confusion analysis (s.6(5))

Read case analysis

Apotex Inc v. Shire LLC

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court upheld key claims of the 646 Patent for lisdexamfetamine, found no anticipation or obviousness, held Apotex’s activities non-infringing due to regulatory use, and granted Shire’s prohibition application.

• Obviousness
• Anticipation
• Infringement
• Experimental and regulatory use exception
• Selection patents
• Prohibition order under pm(noc) regulations

Read case analysis