Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to appeal in the case of Teva Canada Limited v. Pfizer Canada Inc., et al. (Sildenafil) (SCC case #33951) which is an appeal from Federal Court of Appeal decision 2010 FCA 242. The key issue raised in the appeal is the sufficiency of the description in the patent at issue.
The court also granted leave in the copyright case, Access Copyright (Province of Alberta as represented by the Minister of Education, et al. v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency Operating as “Access Copyright” – SCC case #33888) which relates to fair dealing in the educational context.
Excerpt from the Sildenafil Federal Court of Appeal decision 2010 FCA 242:
This is an appeal by Novopharm Limited (the “appellant”) from an Order of Kelen J. of the Federal Court (“the Judge”), 2009 FC 638, dated June 18, 2009 (the “Decision”), which, pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133, prohibited the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of Compliance (a “NOC”) to the appellant for a generic version of sildenafil tablets (marketed commercially by the respondents as Viagra) until the expiry of the respondents’ Canadian Patent No. 2, 163,446 (the “ ‘446 patent”). For the reasons that follow, I conclude that the Judge made no reviewable error in concluding as he did.
More information about these and other intellectual property proceedings at the Supreme Court are available on the Supreme Court litigation page.