Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
39150
Pfizer Canada ULC v. Pharmascience Inc.
(Federal) (Civil) (By Leave)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2021-03-05 | Close file on Leave | |
| 2020-12-11 | Copy of formal judgment sent to Registrar of the Court of Appeal and all parties | |
| 2020-12-11 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
| 2020-12-10 |
Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A-405-19, 2020 FCA 55, dated February 25, 2020, is dismissed with costs. Dismissed, with costs |
|
| 2020-11-02 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, for consideration by the Court | |
| 2020-11-02 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23B - Reply | Pfizer Canada ULC |
| 2020-10-26 | Applicant's reply to respondent's argument, (Book Form), Missing: Form 23B (rec' 11/02/20), Completed on: 2020-11-03 | Pfizer Canada ULC |
| 2020-10-14 | Supplemental document, (Letter Form), Protective Order | Pharmascience Inc. |
| 2020-10-14 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23B, (Printed version filed on 2020-10-16) | Pharmascience Inc. |
| 2020-10-14 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23A, (Printed version filed on 2020-10-16) | Pharmascience Inc. |
| 2020-10-14 | Notice of name, (Letter Form), (Printed version filed on 2020-10-16) | Pharmascience Inc. |
| 2020-10-14 | Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), Completed on: 2020-10-14, (Printed version filed on 2020-10-16) | Pharmascience Inc. |
| 2020-05-12 | Letter acknowledging receipt of a complete application for leave to appeal, FILE OPENED 2020/05/12 | |
| 2020-04-27 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23B | Pfizer Canada ULC |
| 2020-04-27 | Notice of name, (Letter Form) | Pfizer Canada ULC |
| 2020-04-27 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23A | Pfizer Canada ULC |
| 2020-04-27 | Application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), Completed on: 2020-04-27 | Pfizer Canada ULC |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Pfizer Canada ULC | Applicant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmascience Inc. | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Pfizer Canada ULC
Counsel
Allyson Whyte Nowak
Adam Haller
David Yi
222 Bay Street
Suite 3000, P.O. Box 53
Toronto, Ontario
M5K 1E7
Telephone: (416) 216-4000
FAX: (416) 216-3930
Email: orestes.pasparakis@nortonrosefulbright.com
Agent
45 O'Connor Street
Suite 1500
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 1A4
Telephone: (613) 780-8654
FAX: (613) 230-5459
Email: matthew.halpin@nortonrosefulbright.com
Party: Pharmascience Inc.
Counsel
Devin Doyle
100 Murray Street
Suite 300
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 0A1
Telephone: (613) 903-5100
FAX: (613) 695-5854
Email: mklee@aitkenklee.com
Summary
Keywords
Intellectual property — Patents — Medicines — Applicant raising ex turpi causa defence in respondent’s action for damages under section 8 of Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/98 166 — Does the traditional ex turpi causa defence described in Hall v. Hebert, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 159, continue to exist in law, or should illegality be considered only as part of the plaintiff’s underlying cause of action? — Did this Court in Sanofi Aventis v. Apotex Inc., 2015 SCC 20, intend to alter the approach to illegality set out in Hall v. Hebert?
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Since 2004, Pfizer Canada ULC has held a patent for pregabalin, sold under the brand name “Lyrica.” Pharmascience Inc. received a Notice of Compliance in 2013 allowing it to market a generic version of pregabalin. Pharmascience had originally attempted to enter the pregabalin market in 2011 but was prevented from doing so when Pfizer unsuccessfully sought an order under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/98 166, prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of Compliance to Pharmascience. Pharmascience then commenced an action under s. 8 of the Regulations for damages against Pfizer for the sales it allegedly lost during the period of time when it was kept off the market. In response, Pfizer alleged that Pharmascience was disentitled to damages because the hypothetical sales of PMS pregabalin would have infringed Pfizer’s patent. Pfizer alleged that any damages Pharmascience incurred should therefore be reduced or eliminated under s. 8(5) of the Regulations.
Pharmascience brought a motion for a summary trial on the question of whether Pfizer’s defence of ex turpi causa by reason of infringement was relevant to the assessment of damages. The motion judge granted Pharmascience’s motion for a summary trial, holding that the ex turpi causa defence was not viable. This decision was upheld on appeal.
Lower court rulings
Federal Court
T-1434-14, 2019 FC 1271
Order that ex turpi causa unavailable to patent holder
Federal Court of Appeal
A-405-19; 2020 FCA 55
Applicant’s appeal dismissed
Filed documents
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
The condensed books of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here upon receipt of the electronic version, 2 days prior to the scheduled appeal hearing. You may also obtain copies of condensed books by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a condensed book or want permission to use a condensed book, please contact the author of the condensed book directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each condensed book.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available