Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 FEBRUARY 2017

Ongoing Infringement Must Be Parsed To Determine Relevant Limitation Periods

The Federal Court of Appeal held that in the case of an ongoing, continual tort, each infringing act must be examined separately to determine the relevant limitation period.

CanadaIntellectual Property

In the recent decision of Apotex Inc v AstraZeneca Canada Inc 2017 FCA 9 relating to the drug omeprazole, the Federal Court of Appeal held that in the case of an ongoing, continual tort, each infringing act must be examined separately to determine the relevant limitation period.  In particular, where section 39 of the Federal Courts Act (the "Act") is applicable, each infringing act must be examined to determine whether it falls within the scope of: (a) section 39(1) which provides that where a cause of action arises in a province, the applicable provincial limitation period applies, or (b) section 39(2) which provides that a six year limitation period applies for causes of action arising "otherwise than in a province".

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from