Apotex Inc. v. Astrazeneca Canada Inc.
Court headnote
Apotex Inc. v. Astrazeneca Canada Inc. Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-06-09 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 226 File numbers A-153-04 Decision Content Date: 20040609 Docket: A-153-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 226 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MALONE J.A. Date: 20040609 Docket: A-153-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 226 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004) MALONE J.A. [1] The variance order under appeal is discretionary and the test enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Reza v. Canada, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 394 applies. That test has established that this Court may intervene to overturn a Motions Judge's order only where the Motions Judge has failed to give sufficient weight to all relevant factors. It is not sufficient, however, that an appellate court might have placed different weight on each of the relevant factors that were considered and, indeed, have reached a different conclusion on a motion for variance. [2] The test for varying a protective order was set out in Smith, Kline and French Laboratories Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1989] F.…
Read full judgment
Apotex Inc. v. Astrazeneca Canada Inc. Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-06-09 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 226 File numbers A-153-04 Decision Content Date: 20040609 Docket: A-153-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 226 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MALONE J.A. Date: 20040609 Docket: A-153-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 226 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 2004) MALONE J.A. [1] The variance order under appeal is discretionary and the test enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Reza v. Canada, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 394 applies. That test has established that this Court may intervene to overturn a Motions Judge's order only where the Motions Judge has failed to give sufficient weight to all relevant factors. It is not sufficient, however, that an appellate court might have placed different weight on each of the relevant factors that were considered and, indeed, have reached a different conclusion on a motion for variance. [2] The test for varying a protective order was set out in Smith, Kline and French Laboratories Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1989] F.C.J. No. 223 (T.D.), aff'd [1997] F.C.J. No. 689 (C.A.) as being whether the facts establish some change in circumstances or compelling reason to vary. Notwithstanding the able argument of appellant's counsel, we are all satisfied that the Motions Judge considered all the relevant factors and did not commit a reviewable error in varying the protective order as he did. [3] We would dismiss the appeal with costs. "B. Malone" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-153-04 STYLE OF CAUSE: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC. Respondent PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: JUNE 9, 2004 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: (LINDEN, SHARLOW & MALONE JJ.A) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: MALONE J.A. APPEARANCES: Mr. Nando DeLuca Ms. Julie Rosenthall FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. J. Sheldon Hamilton Ms. Kavita Ramamoorthy FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Goodmans LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Smart and Biggar LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca