Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20030326

Docket: A-636-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 166

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

NADON J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             ASTRAZENECA AB and

                                                    ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                                     Appellants

                                                                                                                                              (Respondents)

                                                                                 and

                                                                       APOTEX INC.

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                                                                                                                     (Appellant)

                                                                                 and

                                                        THE MINISTER OF HEALTH

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                                                                                                               (Respondent)

                                             Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 26, 2003.

                      Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 26, 2003.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                     NADON J.A.


Date: 20030326

Docket: A-636-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 166

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

NADON J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             ASTRAZENECA AB and

                                                    ASTRAZENECA CANADA INC.

                                                                                                                                                     Appellants

                                                                                                                                              (Respondents)

                                                                                 and

                                                                       APOTEX INC.

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                                                                                                                     (Appellant)

                                                                                 and

                                                        THE MINISTER OF HEALTH

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                                                                                                               (Respondent)

                                       REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                                           (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario,

                                                                 on March 26, 2003.

NADON J.A.


[1]                 We have not been persuaded that the motion judge made any error when he concluded that the identity of the drug, to which the respondent Apotex Inc. compared its drug, pursuant to section 5(1) of the Patent (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133 (the "Regulations"), does not give rise to any factual issue.

[2]                 We are satisfied that the motion judge, notwithstanding the concerns raised by Ms. Kang, counsel for the appellants, did not determine any of the issues that arise under section 5(1) of the Regulations and which are to be determined at the hearing of the respondent's judicial review application.

[3]                 As the motion judge's determination is the only one which the appellants are challenging before us, we are all agreed that this appeal must be dismissed with costs, which we fix, by consent of the parties, at $2000.

                                                                                                                                                    "M. Nadon"

                                                                                                                                                                  J.A.


                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                                                    A-636-02

APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE TRIAL DIVISION DATED NOVEMBER 6, 2002, TRIAL DIVISION FILE NO. T-812-02

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                     ASTRAZENECA AB ET AL. v. APOTEX INC. ET AL.

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                             Ottawa, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING:                                                               March 26, 2003

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Rothstein, Nadon, Malone JJ.A.)

RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                                Nadon, J.A.                               

APPEARANCES:

Ms. Yoon Kang                                                                             for the Appellants

Ms. Julie Perrin                                                                  for the Respondent, Apotex Inc.

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Smart & Biggar                                                                              for the Appellants

Toronto, Ontario

Goodmans LLP                                                                              for the Respondent, Apotex Inc.

Toronto, Ontario

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.