Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 265, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the novelty and non-obviousness requirements for a patent in Canada. The Court rejected a challenge by the generic drug manufacturer Apotex to declare Synthelabo Canada's patent for Plavix, an anti-coagulant drug, invalid. At issue was whether selection patents are invalid in principle, and if they are not, whether the subject selection patent was invalid on the grounds of anticipation, obviousness or double patenting.
primaryTopic
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 265, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the novelty and non-obviousness requirements for a patent in Canada. The Court rejected a challenge by the generic drug manufacturer Apotex to declare Synthelabo Canada's patent for Plavix, an anti-coagulant drug, invalid. At issue was whether selection patents are invalid in principle, and if they are not, whether the subject selection patent was invalid on the grounds of anticipation, obviousness or double patenting.
has abstract
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo ...... viousness or double patenting.
@en
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
Wikipage page ID
34,176,378
Wikipage revision ID
744,632,829
bot
InternetArchiveBot
case-name
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc
citations
date
decided-date
2008-11-06
Docket
fix-attempted
full-case-name
Sanofi‑Synthelabo Canada Inc., Sanofi‑Synthelabo and Minister of Health
heard-date
2008-04-16
history
Judgment against Apotex in the Federal Court of Appeal.
NotParticipating
McLachlin C.J.
ratio
Selection patents are not invalid under the ''Patent Act.
ruling
Appeal dismissed
Unanimous
subject
hypernym
type
comment
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo ...... viousness or double patenting.
@en
label
Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc
@en