Decision

Canplas Industries Ltd. v. Airturn Products Inc., 2016 FC 109

Justice Barnes - 2016-01-29

Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:

The Defendants have moved to amend their Second Amended Statement of Defence and Counterclaim.  In support of their defence of obviousness, they seek to add a prior art reference concerning a product made by Vent Air, Inc. The Plaintiff opposes the amendments on the ground that the Defendants have not and cannot establish that the Vent Air product was disclosed to the public before the claim date of February 11, 2002. In the absence of an evidentiary foundation, the Plaintiff contends that the proposed citation is speculative and should not be permitted. The amendments were allowed. Where a proposed amendment creates no de facto prejudice, it will almost always be in the interests of justice to err on the side of allowing it.

Decision relates to:

  • T-366-11 - CANPLAS INDUSTRIES LTD. v. AIRTURN PRODUCTS INC.
  • T-719-14 - CANPLAS INDUSTRIES LTD. v. MERIT PRECISION MOULDING LIMITED

 

Canadian Intellectual Property