Galderma Canada Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 46
Justice Fothergill - 2024-01-11
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
In a decision dated December 19, 2016, the PMPRB determined that the 237 Patent was capable of being “used for” Differin, within the meaning of s 79(2) of the Patent Act, and ordered Galderma to provide pricing information for Differin. Galderma sought judicial review in this Court. On November 9, 2017, Justice Michael Phelan quashed the Board’s decision [see 2017 FC 1023] ... the Federal Court of Appeal granted the appeal and remitted the matter to the Board for redetermination [see 2019 FCA 196] ... Galderma has once again sought judicial review of the Board’s decision in this Court. For the reasons that follow, the Board reasonably found that the invention of the 237 Patent pertained to, or could be used for, Differin. The application for judicial review is therefore dismissed. ... Galderma argues that the Board’s failure to assess whether the 237 Patent conferred an ongoing market benefit in relation to Differin renders its decision unreasonable. However, it is clear from the jurisprudence that the mere existence of a patent that pertains to a medicine gives rise to a presumption of market power due to distortion of the competitive process.
Decision relates to:
- T-906-20 - GALDERMA CANADA INC. v. PATENTED MEDICINE PRICES REVIEW BOARD ET AL.
- A-61-24(2024 FCA 208) - which is an appeal from this decision