A-77-97
CORAM: PRATTE J.A.
HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
B E T W E E N :
GLAXO WELLCOME INC.
- and -
THE WELLCOME FOUNDATION LIMITED
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, Thursday, March 20, 1997.
Judgment rendered from the Bench, March 20, 1997.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
DELIVERED BY: HUGESSEN J.A.
A-78-97
CORAM: PRATTE J.A.
HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, Thursday, March 20, 1997.
Judgment rendered from the Bench, March 20, 1997.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
DELIVERED BY: HUGESSEN J.A.
A-79-97
CORAM: PRATTE J.A.
HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, Thursday, March 20, 1997.
Judgment rendered from the Bench, March 20, 1997.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
DELIVERED BY: HUGESSEN J.A.
A-77-97
CORAM: PRATTE J.A.
HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
B E T W E E N :
GLAXO WELLCOME INC.
- and -
THE WELLCOME FOUNDATION LIMITED
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
A-78-97
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
A-79-97
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario,
Thursday, March 20, 1997)
HUGESSEN J.A.
We have not been persuaded that the motions judge wrongly exercised his discretion in granting leave to the respondents to intervene in judicial review proceedings pursuant to Rule 1611.
The only point on which we called on counsel for the respondents was as to the power of the motions judge to grant a right of appeal to the intervenors. While the point is not wholly free from doubt we think it has been settled by this Court's judgment in Sunshine Village Corp. v. Canada (Minister of the Environment)1. The appellants have not convinced us that that case was wrongly decided.
The appeal will be dismissed.
"James K. Hugessen"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
A-77-97
B E T W E E N :
GLAXO WELLCOME INC.
- and -
THE WELLCOME FOUNDATION LIMITED
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
A-78-97
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
A-79-97
B E T W E E N :
MERCK FROSST CANADA INC.
- and -
MERCK & CO. INC.
Appellants
(Applicants)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondents
(Respondents)
- and -
APOTEX INC.
- and -
NOVOPHARM LIMITED
Respondents
(Intervenors)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
__________________
1 June 5, 1996, A-464-95, (F.C.A.) per Stone J.A.[unreported]
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: A-79-97
APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE TRIAL DIVISION DATED JANUARY 29, 1997 IN T-304-96.
STYLE OF CAUSE: Merck Frosst Canada Inc. et al. v. The Minister of National Health and Welfare et al.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: Thursday, March 20, 1997
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Pratte J. A. Hugessen J.A. Décary J. A.
RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Hugessen J. A.
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Judith M. Robinson
Mr. Leigh D. Crestohl for the Appellants
Mr. André LespéranceÃÂ for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Edward Hore
Mr. Roger B. Bauman for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ogilvy Renault
Montreal, Quebec for the Appellants
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Hazzard & Hore
Toronto, Ontario for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: A-78-97
APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE TRIAL DIVISION DATED JANUARY 29, 1997 IN T-306-96.
STYLE OF CAUSE: Merck Frosst Canada Inc. et al. v.
The Minister of National Health and Welfare et al.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: Thursday, March 20, 1997
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Pratte J. A. Hugessen,ÃÂ J.A. Décary J. A.
RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Hugessen, J. A.
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Judith M. Robinson
Mr. Leigh D. CrestohlÃÂ for the Appellants
Mr. André Lespérance for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Edward Hore
Mr. Roger B. BaumanÃÂ for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ogilvy Renault
Montreal, QuebecÃÂ for the Appellants
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, OntarioÃÂ for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Hazzard & Hore
Toronto, OntarioÃÂ for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: A-77-97
APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE TRIAL DIVISION DATED JANUARY 29, 1997 IN T-386-96.
STYLE OF CAUSE: Glaxo Wellcome Inc. v.
The Minister of National Health and Welfare et al.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: Thursday, March 20, 1997
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Pratte J. A. Hugessen J. A. Décary J.A.
RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Hugessen J. A.
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Judith M. Robinson
Mr. Leigh D. Crestohl for the Appellants
Mr. André LespéranceÃÂ for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Edward Hore
Mr. Roger B. BaumanÃÂ for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ogilvy Renault
Montreal, QuebecÃÂ for the Appellants
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, OntarioÃÂ for the Respondents Minister of National Health and Welfare and the Attorney General of Canada
Hazzard & Hore
Toronto, OntarioÃÂ for the Respondents Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Limited.
Email this Content