mironovak / iStockphoto.com
Canada has a robust and reliable framework for resolving IP disputes, and it shouldn’t be ignored by litigants, say Ron Dimock, Sangeetha Punniyamoorthy and Nikolas Purcell of DLA Piper.
While Canada is known for its natural resources and universal healthcare, it is often overlooked as a jurisdiction to litigate IP disputes.
This article sets out several reasons why this oversight is unwarranted. Owing to a market approval regime for pharmaceuticals similar to the Hatch-Waxman Act in the US, as well as the heavy reliance Canada’s healthcare system places on generic pharmaceuticals, Canadian courts are tried and tested when it comes to resolving complex patent and other IP disputes.
Canada’s strength in this area is largely the result of the chief forum for IP disputes: the Federal Court of Canada. Since its inception almost 50 years ago, the Federal Court has had near-exclusive jurisdiction over IP matters. This has resulted in court practices that are tailored to, and a judiciary familiar with, IP litigation. Beyond the effective forum of the Federal Court, the available remedies and the comparatively lower expense associated with litigation make Canada an ideal jurisdiction when considering where to litigate IP matters.
To continue reading this article and to access our full archive, digital magazines and special reports you will need a subscription.
If you have already subscribed please login.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription we can add you into, please email Atif at email@example.com
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
For access to the complete website and archive choose '12 MONTH SUBSCRIPTION'. For a free, two-week trial select ‘TWO WEEK FREE TRIAL’.
Ron Dimock, Sangeetha Punniyamoorthy, Nikolas Purcell, DLA Piper, Candian IP, litigation, pharmaceuticals, Hatch-Waxman Act, framework, Purcell