Today, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Nova Chemicals Corp. v. Dow Chemical Co., 2022 SCC 43 regarding the quantification of an accounting of profits as a result of patent infringement. The majority dismissed the appeal with a focus on the ‘non-infringing option’: “a non-infringing option helps courts isolate the profits causally attributable to the invention from the profits which arose at the same time the infringing product was used or sold, but which are not causally attributable to the invention.” The majority also upheld springboard profits, saying, “a portion of such post-expiry profits may be causally attributable to infringement of the invention.” Continue reading Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision today in York University v Access Copyright. The Court agreed with the Federal Court of Appeal that the tariff is not enforceable against York University, saying that a user is entitled to obtain its rights through other means than a tariff, so if the user makes an unauthorized use, the appropriate remedy is an action for infringement. The Court did not endorse the fair dealing analysis conducted by the lower courts and declined to make a decision on fair dealing but did discuss that in the educational context it is not only the institutional perspective that matters.
The Supreme Court of Canada is expected to release its leave decision on Thursday in York University v. Access Copyright on copyright tariffs and fair dealing.
Earlier today, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision in Keatley Surveying Ltd. v. Teranet Inc., 2019 SCC 43, with the Court finding that the copyright in the plans of survey digitized, stored and copied by Ontario’s service provider, Teranet, vested in the Crown pursuant to s.12 of the Copyright Act.
The Honourable Sheilah L. Martin was appointed today to the Supreme Court of Canada. In the Federal Court, Justice Paul Favel was appointed to replace Justice Russell who elected to become a supernumerary judge. Appointments were also made to the Saskatchewan and Quebec courts. Continue reading Appointments
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held today that the promise doctrine is not the correct approach to determine whether a patent has sufficient utility. As a result, the lower court decisions finding the patent at issue directed to Esomeprazole/Nexium invalid for want of utility, were set aside.
The Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision today in Google Inc. v. Equustek Solutions Inc., 2017 SCC 34, with the majority holding in the 7-2 decision that the trial judge should be given deference in determining an interlocutory injunction, and where it is necessary to ensure the injunction’s effectiveness, a court can grant an injunction enjoining conduct anywhere in the world, including in this case against third-party Google. The underlying proceeding related to passing off and trade secret infringement by a defendant which was conducted outside B.C. through a series of changing websites.
The Supreme Court announced that it will be releasing the decision in AstraZeneca Canada Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. on Friday, June 30th. It is expected that the decision will consider whether lower courts erred in law in finding the patent invalid: (i) on the basis of a “promise of the patent” utility doctrine; and/or (ii) by applying an incorrect standard for patent utility.