Law Times

November 26, 2018

The premier weekly newspaper for the legal profession in Ontario

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 0 of 19

PM #40762529 $5.00 • Vol. 29, No. 38 November 26, 2018 L AW TIMES C O V E R I N G O N T A R I O ' S L E G A L S C E N E • W W W . L A W T I M E S N E W S . C O M Decision resurrects disputed patent principle Gunars Gaikis says a recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision could have an immediate impact on other cases involving pharmaceutical giant Apotex. Photo: Laura Pedersen DIVORCE DOCUMENTS Decision may streamline services internationally P4 EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING Get rid of articling and develop new model P7 FOCUS ON Personal Injury Law P8 BY ANITA BALAKRISHNAN Law Times A group of pharmaceuti- cal companies will be allowed to argue that a decision that invalidated one of their patents was decided based on "wrong legal principles," a panel of Court of Appeal of On- tario judges said. Gunars Gaikis, a partner at Smart & Biggar in Toronto, who represented a group of appellants associated with Sanofi-Aventis, says the decision could have an immediate impact favouring the defendants on other cases involv- ing pharmaceutical giant Apotex, pointing to an Ontario Superior Court of Justice case, Apotex Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, and Apotex Inc. v Pfizer Ltd. in Que- bec Superior Court in the district of Montreal. The Nov. 8 decision, Apotex Inc. v. Schering Corporation, 2018 ONCA 890, quashes a Febru- ary Superior Court of Justice deci- sion by Justice Sean Dunphy. This latest judgment, written by Justice Ian Nordheimer with Chief Justice George Strathy and Justice Colin McKinnon concurring, re- volves around Ramipril, a drug used to treat high blood pressure and heart disease. One long-disputed patent for Ramipril was held by Schering and licensed by Sanofi, Nord- heimer wrote, which came into conf lict with Apotex's plan to market a generic drug similar to Ramipril. The patent, patent 206, was invalidated under a legal conven- tion called the promise doctrine, which holds that if a patentee's pat- ent application promises a specific utility, only if that promise is ful- filled, can the invention have the requisite utility needed to be valid, according to the Supreme Court of Canada. The invalidation of patent 206 led to a decade-long battle from 2003 to 2015 over whether the pat- ent was in violation of Ontario's Statute of Monopolies, Nord- heimer's decision said. At one point in 2012, Apotex was awarded $215 million in com- pensation on the grounds that Sanofi delayed Apotex's 2007 en- try into the drug market. This lengthy and expensive court battle was further compli- cated in June 2017, when a pivotal See Case, page 2 Pro Bono Ontario requests LSO match BY ANITA BALAKRISHNAN Law Times P ro Bono Ontario says the Law Society of Ontario is considering funding to sustain Pro Bono Ontario's Law Help Centres, which are set to close Dec. 14. The Law Society of Ontario requested five years of detailed fi- nancial and program information from Pro Bono Ontario, which was submitted earlier this week, says executive director Lynn Burns. The goal is for Pro Bono On- tario to raise $250,000 from the private bar and receive a match from the LSO for the remain- ing $250,000, Burns wrote in an emailed statement. So far, Pro Bono Ontario has been successful in raising the $250,000 in private donations. The Law Help Centres are lo- cated in two courthouses in To- ronto and one in Ottawa and aim to connect volunteer lawyers with litigants who may not be able to af- ford a lawyer or may be self-repre- sented. Earlier this month, Pro Bono Ontario said the centres would close due to lack of funding and that it would take $500,000 to sus- tain the centres into 2019. An LSO funding inf lux would be a change from Pro Bono On- tario's situation earlier this month, when the law society said that there were no plans to alter its $50,000 annual contribution to Pro Bono Ontario as the law society had not received a request for additional funding. As of mid-day on Nov. 22, LSO senior communications ad- visor Susan Tonkin confirmed that the law society had been in touch with Pro Bono Ontario, but she did not provide further updates. The law society's board, Convo- cation, has its next public meeting on Nov. 30. Burns says the law help centres are prepared for an orderly wind- down by year end if Pro Bono Ontario does not raise the needed funds. See Prudent, page 2 Follow & $#&!&jmmm$cYa[bbWh$Yec ntitled-4 1 12-03-20 10:44 AM THE ULTIMATE SOURCE For Today's Legal Profession | 416.609.3800 | 1.800.387.5164 Online Free preview Subscribe today! ONE-YEAR SUBSCRIPTION INCLUDES: • 10 issues print and digital editions • FREE exclusive access to Canadian Lawyer digital edition archives • FREE weekly e-newsletter: Canadian Legal Newswire THE TOP MOST INFLUENTIAL $ 1 1 . 9 5 A u g u s t 2 0 1 8 MAKING AN IMPACT MEET THE CANADIAN LAWYERS AND JUDGES WHO ARE SPECIAL SECTION: CANADIAN LAWYER 4STUDENTS P.51 CHANGEMAKERS HUMAN RIGHTS, ADVOCACY AND CRIMINAL CORPORATE COMMERCIAL YOUNG INFLUENCERS GOVERNMENT/ NON-PROFITS/ ASSOCIATIONS PM AGREEMENT # 40766500 Untitled-1 1 2018-11-21 8:19 AM Dirk Derstine says the Toronto Lawyers Association examined Pro Bono Ontario's financial statements.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Law Times - November 26, 2018