As previously reported, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Abbott and Takeda’s motion for summary judgment in an action brought by Apotex under section 8 of the PMNOC Regulations. The action relates to lansoprazole, the active ingredient in Apo-Lansoprazole and Abbott’s PREVACID. On April 5, 2018, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Abbott and Takeda’s appeal: Apotex Inc. v Abbott Laboratories Limited, 2018 ONCA 332. The appellants argued that Apo-Lansoprazole could not and would not have received regulatory approval in April 2007 and Apotex was not entitled to damages. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that the motions judge did not err in finding that Apo-Lansoprazole would have received approval in April 2007. This date was consistent with Apotex’s expert evidence and the timing of Health Canada’s letter indicating that Apo-Lansoprazole was approvable in the real world. While Health Canada subsequently reversed its position, that reversal could only be relevant to the quantum of Apotex’s damages and did not render the earlier letter void ab initio.
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
