On April 20, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Sanofi-Aventis' appeal concerning a claim by Apotex for section 8 damages under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. Apotex's claim followed prohibition proceedings involving Apotex's generic version of ramipril, marketed by Sanofi as ALTACE®. This was the first section 8 damages appeal heard by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal from the bench, stating only that it did so substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Federal Court of Appeal. As such, the law in respect of section 8 damages remains as set out by the Court of Appeal on March 14, 2014, in its decisions relating to Apotex's claim and Teva Canada Ltd.'s similar section 8 damages claim regarding generic ramipril. A discussion of these ramipril appeal decisions is available here. Teva did not seek leave from the Supreme Court to appeal any of these decisions.
The ramipril appeal decisions were decided on the unique factual circumstances of those cases. The Supreme Court's dismissal of Sanofi's appeal without further reasons provides no additional guidance on whether, and how, the Court of Appeal's various findings might apply to the specific circumstances of future section 8 damages cases.
Click here for the Supreme Court of Canada's dismissal of Sanofi's appeal.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
