Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 JANUARY 2017

To Engage Or Not To Engage: Guidance On Motions To Strike A Within Application

Cassels
Cassels
Contributor
Cassels

Cassels

Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP is a Canadian law firm focused on serving the transaction, advocacy,...

View firm profile
Explore more from Cassels

The Federal Court has reaffirmed and clarified how a pharmaceutical brand company should respond to a generic company's motion to strike an application for abuse of process...

CanadaIntellectual Property

The Federal Court has reaffirmed and clarified how a pharmaceutical brand company should respond to a generic company's motion to strike an application for abuse of process under s. 6(5)(b) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations.

In Valeant Canada LP / Valeant Canada S.E.C. v Apotex Inc. (2016 CarswellNat 6573, 2016 FC 1359), the court reaffirmed that a generic company – in this case, Apotex Inc. ("Apotex") – may bring a 6(5)(b) motion at almost any time, and that, in order to succeed, a brand company – Valeant Canada LP / Valeant Canada S.E.C. ("Valeant"), in this case – must respond in some manner to show the application is not bereft of any chance of success. In other words, a brand company that deliberately chooses not to file evidence either in support of its application or in response to a 6(5)(b) motion must live with the consequences of, in many cases, having its application struck.

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