Docket: A-298-13
Citation: 2014 FCA 142
|
CORAM:
|
SHARLOW J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
MAINVILLE J.A.
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
APOTEX INC.
|
|
Appellant
|
|
and
|
|
ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. AND AKTIEBOLAGET HÄSSLE
|
|
Respondents
|
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 28, 2014.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 28,
2014.
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
|
GAUTHIER
J.A.
|
Docket: A-298-13
Citation:
2014 FCA 142
|
CORAM:
|
SHARLOW J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
MAINVILLE J.A.
|
|
Docket: A-298-13
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
APOTEX INC.
|
|
Appellant
|
|
and
|
|
ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. AND AKTIEBOLAGET HASSLE
|
|
Respondents
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 28, 2014).
GAUTHIER J.A.
[1]
This is an appeal from the order of Kane
J. of the Federal Court (2013 FC 926) upholding the order of Prothonotary
Aronovitch granting leave to Astrazeneca to add certain paragraphs to their
Third Amended Statement of Claim in their patent infringement action (file T-1409-04). These amendments relate to the Astrazeneca’s
standing and to damages sought by Astrazeneca in respect of the compensation it
will have to pay under the section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of
Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133 proceeding instituted by Apotex (file T-2300-05).
[2]
The judge was satisfied that the
prothonotary had not erred and that even if the matter had to be reviewed on a de
novo basis, she would have arrived at the same conclusion. She noted that
the merits of the section 8 damages claims were best left to the trial judge.
[3]
Having reviewed the record and the parties'
submissions, and considering their oral arguments, we have not been persuaded
that the judge committed an error that would justify this Court’s intervention,
particularly in a file of such complexity where the case manager had such an
intimate knowledge of all the relevant proceedings and of the uniqueness of the
circumstances.
[4]
Obviously, our decision should not be understood
as endorsing the validity of the claims which have yet to be determined by the
trial judge.
[5]
Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed with
costs
"Johanne Gauthier"
FEDERAL
COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES
OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE
JUSTICE KANE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA, DATED AUGUST 30, 2013, DOCKET NO.
T-1409-04
|
STYLE OF CAUSE:
|
APOTEX INC. v.
ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. AND AKTIEBOLAGET HÄSSLE
|
|
PLACE OF
HEARING:
|
Toronto, Ontario
|
|
DATE OF
HEARING:
|
May 28, 2014
|
|
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
|
SHARLOW J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
MAINVILLE J.A.
|
|
DELIVERED
FROM THE BENCH BY:
|
GAUTHIER
J.A.
|
APPEARANCES:
|
Andrew Brodkin
Daniel Cappe
|
For The
Appellant
|
|
Mark G. Biernacki
|
For The
Respondents
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Goodmans LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
Toronto, Ontario
|
For The
Appellant
|
|
Smart & Biggar
Barristers and Solicitors
Toronto, Ontario
|
For The
Respondents
|