Loading…
The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents
In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada abolished the so-called promise doctrine in patent law. Large pharmaceutical companies that sought greater patent protections through litigation routinely mischaracterized the promise doctrine. To demonstrate that mischaracterizatio...
Saved in:
Published in: | Appeal, review of current law and law reform review of current law and law reform, 2022-01 (27), p.70 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 27 |
container_start_page | 70 |
container_title | Appeal, review of current law and law reform |
container_volume | |
creator | Wagner, Darren N |
description | In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada abolished the so-called promise doctrine in patent law. Large pharmaceutical companies that sought greater patent protections through litigation routinely mischaracterized the promise doctrine. To demonstrate that mischaracterization, this case comment begins by examining historical and international perspectives that informed the Supreme Court's decision. This paper then turns to a critical yet subjective element of the decision: the analysis of the meaning and purpose of "use" and "useful" in the Patent Act. The reasons for the decision are then considered against the advantages that more stringent utility requirements offer to both patent law and the pharmaceutical industry. This paper concludes with the recent legacy of the decision and recommendations for why and how the courts might seek a middle ground for utility promises in patents. |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2666962116</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2666962116</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p113t-6ef0ee5f2f8cdc1810116d5839c1c2de9f0f2aee4f34fc7e5a066f0697dee56a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotzc1KAzEUBeAsFKzVd7jgeiA_nXTG3ThaLRScRQVxUy7JDZ3aJmOSER_fwbo6nMX5zgWbCcnLQgv5fsWuUzpwLiuu5Iz12z3BQwyf5KGL4dQngsdgcuw93UOTcsQP8mQQWvRoEdbewDc0Q8j081fQW8gTshrzGAmCg26P8YSGxtwbPEKHmXxON-zS4THR7X_O2dvqadu-FJvX53XbbIpBCJULTY4TlU66ylgjKsGF0LasVG2EkZZqx51EooVTC2eWVCLX2nFdL-0006jm7O7sDjF8jZTy7hDG6KfLndRa11pOoPoFryhTKg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2666962116</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents</title><source>Nexis UK</source><source>CRKN Open Access Journals List</source><creator>Wagner, Darren N</creator><creatorcontrib>Wagner, Darren N</creatorcontrib><description>In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada abolished the so-called promise doctrine in patent law. Large pharmaceutical companies that sought greater patent protections through litigation routinely mischaracterized the promise doctrine. To demonstrate that mischaracterization, this case comment begins by examining historical and international perspectives that informed the Supreme Court's decision. This paper then turns to a critical yet subjective element of the decision: the analysis of the meaning and purpose of "use" and "useful" in the Patent Act. The reasons for the decision are then considered against the advantages that more stringent utility requirements offer to both patent law and the pharmaceutical industry. This paper concludes with the recent legacy of the decision and recommendations for why and how the courts might seek a middle ground for utility promises in patents.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1205-612X</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Appeal Publishing Society</publisher><subject>Litigation ; Patent law ; Pharmaceutical industry ; Supreme Court decisions</subject><ispartof>Appeal, review of current law and law reform, 2022-01 (27), p.70</ispartof><rights>Copyright Appeal Publishing Society 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wagner, Darren N</creatorcontrib><title>The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents</title><title>Appeal, review of current law and law reform</title><description>In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada abolished the so-called promise doctrine in patent law. Large pharmaceutical companies that sought greater patent protections through litigation routinely mischaracterized the promise doctrine. To demonstrate that mischaracterization, this case comment begins by examining historical and international perspectives that informed the Supreme Court's decision. This paper then turns to a critical yet subjective element of the decision: the analysis of the meaning and purpose of "use" and "useful" in the Patent Act. The reasons for the decision are then considered against the advantages that more stringent utility requirements offer to both patent law and the pharmaceutical industry. This paper concludes with the recent legacy of the decision and recommendations for why and how the courts might seek a middle ground for utility promises in patents.</description><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Patent law</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical industry</subject><subject>Supreme Court decisions</subject><issn>1205-612X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNotzc1KAzEUBeAsFKzVd7jgeiA_nXTG3ThaLRScRQVxUy7JDZ3aJmOSER_fwbo6nMX5zgWbCcnLQgv5fsWuUzpwLiuu5Iz12z3BQwyf5KGL4dQngsdgcuw93UOTcsQP8mQQWvRoEdbewDc0Q8j081fQW8gTshrzGAmCg26P8YSGxtwbPEKHmXxON-zS4THR7X_O2dvqadu-FJvX53XbbIpBCJULTY4TlU66ylgjKsGF0LasVG2EkZZqx51EooVTC2eWVCLX2nFdL-0006jm7O7sDjF8jZTy7hDG6KfLndRa11pOoPoFryhTKg</recordid><startdate>20220101</startdate><enddate>20220101</enddate><creator>Wagner, Darren N</creator><general>Appeal Publishing Society</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20220101</creationdate><title>The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents</title><author>Wagner, Darren N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p113t-6ef0ee5f2f8cdc1810116d5839c1c2de9f0f2aee4f34fc7e5a066f0697dee56a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Patent law</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical industry</topic><topic>Supreme Court decisions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wagner, Darren N</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Appeal, review of current law and law reform</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wagner, Darren N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents</atitle><jtitle>Appeal, review of current law and law reform</jtitle><date>2022-01-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><issue>27</issue><spage>70</spage><pages>70-</pages><issn>1205-612X</issn><abstract>In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada abolished the so-called promise doctrine in patent law. Large pharmaceutical companies that sought greater patent protections through litigation routinely mischaracterized the promise doctrine. To demonstrate that mischaracterization, this case comment begins by examining historical and international perspectives that informed the Supreme Court's decision. This paper then turns to a critical yet subjective element of the decision: the analysis of the meaning and purpose of "use" and "useful" in the Patent Act. The reasons for the decision are then considered against the advantages that more stringent utility requirements offer to both patent law and the pharmaceutical industry. This paper concludes with the recent legacy of the decision and recommendations for why and how the courts might seek a middle ground for utility promises in patents.</abstract><pub>Appeal Publishing Society</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1205-612X |
ispartof | Appeal, review of current law and law reform, 2022-01 (27), p.70 |
issn | 1205-612X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2666962116 |
source | Nexis UK; CRKN Open Access Journals List |
subjects | Litigation Patent law Pharmaceutical industry Supreme Court decisions |
title | The Broken Promise Doctrine: AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc and the Future of Pharmaceutical Patents |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T20%3A27%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Broken%20Promise%20Doctrine:%20AstraZeneca%20Canada%20Inc%20v%20Apotex%20Inc%20and%20the%20Future%20of%20Pharmaceutical%20Patents&rft.jtitle=Appeal,%20review%20of%20current%20law%20and%20law%20reform&rft.au=Wagner,%20Darren%20N&rft.date=2022-01-01&rft.issue=27&rft.spage=70&rft.pages=70-&rft.issn=1205-612X&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2666962116%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p113t-6ef0ee5f2f8cdc1810116d5839c1c2de9f0f2aee4f34fc7e5a066f0697dee56a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2666962116&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |