Teva v Sanofi; Apotex v Sanofi / ramipril (NOC) 2012 FC 551 Snider J
Validity attacks on s 8 of the NOC Regulations were raised by Sanofi in two separate actions
before Snider J, in which Teva and Apotex are seeking to recover s 8 damages. The same
arguments were raised before Hughes J by AstraZeneca in similar circumstances. By agreement
of the parties, the validity arguments in all three cases were argued before Snider J and Hughes J
together. As described in my previous post, Hughes J rejected these arguments. In her decision dealing with this point alone,
Snider J has done the same. Snider J held that most of the validity attacks raised by Sanofi did
not arise on the facts of the particular disputes. On the question of whether s 8 complies with
TRIPS and NAFTA, Snider J adopted the reasons of Hughes J as her own [55].
No comments:
Post a Comment