Trademark confusion, damages proceedings under the PM(NOC) Regulations and inventive concept were the big issues for 2012 based on an analysis of the reported intellectual property decisions from the Federal Court and Federal Court of the Appeal during the past year. The Supreme Court’s 2006 Mattel decision was the most frequently cited decision.
Using an automated analysis of the intellectual property decisions released in 2012 and the cases cited in those decisions, the following list contains the most frequently cited decisions of 2012:
1. Mattel, Inc. v. 3894207 Canada Inc., 2006 SCC 22 – confusion and famous trademarks
2. Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc., 2011 SCC 27 (tied) – trademark confusion
2. Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 (tied) – standard of review
2. Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., 2009 FCA 187 (alendronate) (tied) – constitutionality of Section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations
3. Consolboard Inc. v. MacMillan Bloedel (Sask.) Ltd.,  1 SCR 504 (tied) – utility and role of the specification
3. Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Novopharm Limited, 2010 FCA 197 (olanzapine) (tied) – selection patents
3. Whirlpool Corp. v. Camco Inc., 2000 SCC 67 (tied) – claim construction
3. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin v. Boutiques Cliquot Ltée, 2006 SCC 23 (tied) – trademark confusion
4. Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (tied) – standard of review for appeal court
4. Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., 2008 FC 1185 (alendronate) (tied) – application of Section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations
4. Apotex Inc. v. Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc., 2008 SCC 61 (tied) – obviousness and anticipation, selection patents
While many parallel citations have been incorporated in this analysis, use of parallel citations and incomplete citations may affect these results.
This list can be compared to the list from 2011. Unlike last year, a decision from the Federal Court makes the list – Justice Hughes’ decision relating to damages proceedings under the PM(NOC) Regulations.