After the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that AstraZeneca’s patent relating to esomeprazole (NEXIUM) was not invalid for inutility and the SCC’s dismissal of Apotex’s post-judgment motion for reconsideration and rehearing, Apotex sought to raise new grounds of patent invalidity in the Federal Court, premised on “overpromising” under insufficiency, wilful misleading and overbreadth. Justice Locke dismissed Apotex’s motion (AstraZeneca v Apotex, 2018 FC 185): the validity of the patent was finally decided by the SCC; any doubt that might have remained about the SCC’s intent was resolved by the SCC’s dismissal of Apotex’s motion. Justice Locke also held that AstraZeneca was entitled to a declaration of infringement and ordered the quantification of AstraZeneca’s damages or Apotex’s profits. Apotex has appealed.
Related Publications & Articles
-
2025 highlights in Canadian life sciences IP and regulatory law
In 2025, the Rx IP Update team at Smart & Biggar reported on a number of developments in Canadian life sciences IP and regulatory law.Read More -
Federal Court denies class action certification in generic drug price fixing case
The Federal Court has dismissed a request to certify a proposed class proceeding against a large number of generic drug companies named as defendants under sections 45 and 46 of the Competition Act: ...Read More -
Federal Court provides process guidance for summary judgment motions and trials
On June 22, 2026, the Federal Court released an amended version of the Case and Trial Management Guidelines for Complex Proceedings, Proceedings under the PM(NOC) Regulations, and Appeals under Subsec...Read More
