Apotex Inc. v Eli Lilly and Company, 2017 ONSC 7204
2017-12-01
Read full decision. Summary prepared by Alan Macek:
In a valiant but ultimately futile effort to bring proportionality to this action, I heard what I had hoped would be an attenuated refusals motion in which the parties might focus on what was truly needed to get the case to trial. It is apparent that the parties have much more on their respective plates than just this one piece of litigation. So their positions are driven by far wider considerations. Unless or until the court determines that the parties have consumed more than their fair share of scarce public resources, their battles appear to be destined to continue as unrelenting as the 500 year war between Eminiar VII and Vendikar. ... The question proposed by Lilly [about a communication that occurred between Apotex and the government during the abbreviated new drug submission process] in this case is probative of its pleading of an alternative the start date for the calculation of Apotex’s damages under s. 8 (1)(a)(ii) and is therefore permissible.