Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19981117


Docket: A-370-98

CORAM:      STONE J.A.

         McDONALD J.A.

         SEXTON J.A.

BETWEEN:

     APOTEX INC.

     Appellant

     (Respondent)

     - and -

     NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CANADA INC.

     and NOVARTIS AG

     Respondent

     (Applicant)

     - and -

     THE MINISTER OF HEALTH

     Respondent

     (Respondent)

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

     (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on

     Tuesday, November 17, 1998)

STONE J.A.:

[1]      We are all of the view that this appeal must fail. The appellant has not persuaded us that we should interfere with the protective order of Wetston J. of May 29, 1998 refusing to incorporate into that order a "For Counsel's Eyes Only" feature. That order was plainly made on the particular record in exercise of the Motions Judge's discretion and it has not been demonstrated that in doing so the judge made a reversible error of law.

[2]      The appeal will be dismissed with costs

"A.J. Stone"

J.A.

              FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

DOCKET:                          A-370-98

STYLE OF CAUSE:                  APOTEX INC.
                                         Appellant
                                         (Respondent)
                             - and -
                             NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CANADA INC. and NOVARTIS AG
                                         Respondent
                                         (Applicant)
                             - and -
                             THE MINISTER OF HEALTH
                                         Respondent
                                         (Respondent)

DATE OF HEARING:                  TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1998

PLACE OF HEARING:                  TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:          STONE J.A.

Delivered at Toronto, Ontario

on Tuesday, November 17, 1998

APPEARANCES:                      Mr. H. B. Radomski

                    

                                 For the Appellant (Respondent)
                             Mr. Anthony G. Creber and
                             Mr. Patrick Smith

                                 For the Respondent (Applicant)

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:              Goodman Phillips & Vineberg
                             Barristers & Solicitors
                             250 Yonge Street
                             Box 24, Suite 2400
                             Toronto, Ontario
                             M5B 2M6
                                 For the Appellant (Respondent)

                             Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

                             160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600
                             Ottawa, Ontario
                             K1P 1C3

                                 For the Respondent (Applicant)


                                             FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
                                             Date: 19981117
                                             Docket: A-370-98
                                             BETWEEN:
                                             APOTEX INC.
                                                  Appellant
                                                  (Respondent)
                                             - and -
                                             NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CANADA INC.and NOVARTIS AG
                                                  Respondent
                                                  (Applicant)
                                             - and -
                                             THE MINISTER OF HEALTH
                                                  Respondent
                                                  (Respondent)
                                            
                                             REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
                                             OF THE COURT
                                            
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.