Pharmaceutical inventions have been the subject of special provisions in the past, the likes of which have not been applied to other inventions. Furthermore, pharmaceuticals are the subject of much government regulation outside of the patent system.
2018 FCA 32 - The FCA dismissed Apotex’s appeal challenging the remedial decision, regarding Bayer's Canadian Patent No. 2,382,426, holding that subsection 57(1) of the Patent Act did not grant a defendant in a patent infringement suit the right to choose an accounting of profits over damages to be paid to the patentee.
2017 FC 726 - The FC held that Apotex did not satisfy the factual burden required to establish a hypothetically viable non-infringing substitute during the period of infringement, which could reduce the infringement profits owed to AstraZeneca.
2017 FC 857 - The Federal Court upheld the Minister of Health’s decision to cancel reconsideration for Apo-Omeprazole Magnesium Tablets manufactured by Apotex Inc. This is yet another failed attempt by Apotex to obtain approval for the magnesium tablet form of its anti-ulcer drug.
2017 FC 777 - The FC rejected Teva’s allegations that Pfizer's Canadian patent was obvious and lacked utility. The FC found that the POSITA would not have been able to predict the novel crystalline form taught by the patent, and that the subject-matter of the invention claimed in the patent was useful.
2017 FC 774 - The FC granted Pfizer's order pursuant to Section 6 of the PM(NOC) Regulations, prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a NOC to Apotex, with respect to a Canadian patent The FC found, on a balance of probabilities, that Apotex’s allegations of obviousness, inutility, non-infringement, overpromising, anticipation and double patenting were not justified.