Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Inc.

Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Inc.
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2003-05-21
Neutral citation
2003 FCA 232
File numbers
A-90-03
Decision Content
Date: 20030521
Docket: A-90-03
Citation: 2003FCA 232
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
ASTRAZENECA AB and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.
Appellants
and
APOTEX INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH
Respondents
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario on May 21, 2003.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on May 21, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A.
Date: 20030521
Docket: A-90-03
Citation: 2003FCA 232
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
ASTRAZENECA AB and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.
Appellants
and
APOTEX INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on May 21, 2003)
SHARLOW J.A.
[1] This is an appeal from the decision of a judge of the Trial Division, upholding a decision of a prothonotary that permitted the respondent Apotex to file an additional affidavit in prohibition proceedings commenced by the appellants under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. The appellant submits that the affidavit raises matters beyond the legal and factual basis set out in the Notice of Allegation, which is the document that defines the issues in proceedings of this kind. The same argument was made before the prothonotary, who concluded that the affidavit was required to permit the respondent to explain what the appellants apparently considered to be a contradiction that arose in other material filed in the course of the proceedings. The same argument was also made before the Trial Judge, who concluded that the prothonotary had considered the relevant facts and exercised her discretion judicially. We are all of the view that the Trial Judge made no error of law, or any other kind of error that warrants the intervention of this Court.
[2] This appeal will be dismissed with costs, which are hereby fixed at $ 6,000, inclusive of disbursements and GST, payable forthwith in any event of the cause.
(s) "K. Sharlow"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-90-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: ASTRAZENECA AB and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. v. APOTEX INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: May 21, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT :Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario
DATED: May 21, 2003
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Gunars A. Gaikis FOR THE APPELLANTS
Mr. Andrew R. Brodkin
Mr. Ildiko Mehes FOR THE RESPONDENTS
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Smart & Biggar
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANTS
Goodmans LLP
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENTS