Apotex Inc. v. Astrazeneca Canada Inc., 2016 FC 552 (Esomeprazole*)

Proth. Tabib - 2016-05-16

Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:

AstraZeneca brings this motion to amend its statement of defence in the context of Apotex’s action for damages pursuant to Section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations. The proposed amendments directed to particulars of Apotex's of the 'but for' world and the relationship to the real world. The amendments were denied. The first amendment was merely a complaint as to the sufficiency of Apotex's pleadings. The second amendment, while vague and open-ended was clarified by counsel at the hearing and found not to be unduly prejudicial so leave was granted to amend with additional particulars, to allege what it would have done if Apotex had launched in the manner set out in its particulars, including that AstraZeneca would have launched an authorized generic sooner than it in fact did and would not have opposed other generics coming onto the market.

Decision relates to:



Canadian Intellectual Property