Global InformationApotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd information
| Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd | |
|---|---|
 Supreme Court of Canada | |
| Hearing: February 14, 2002 Judgment: December 5, 2002 | |
| Full case name | Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Ltd. v. Wellcome Foundation Limited, Glaxo Wellcome Inc., Interpharm Inc. and Allen Barry Shechtman |
| Citations | 2002 SCC 77, [2002] 4 S.C.R. 153 |
| Docket No. | 28287 [1] |
| Prior history | Judgment against Apotex in the Federal Court of Appeal. |
| Ruling | Appeal dismissed. |
| Holding | |
| The doctrine of sound prediction is a valid way of determining the utility of a patent. | |
| Court membership | |
| Chief Justice: Beverley McLachlin Puisne Justices: Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, Charles Gonthier, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major, Michel Bastarache, Ian Binnie, Louise Arbour, Louis LeBel | |
| Reasons given | |
| Unanimous reasons by | Binnie J. |
Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd, [2002] 4 S.C.R. 153, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the utility requirement for a patent in Canada. The Court rejected a challenge by the generic drug manufacturers Novopharm and Apotex to declare Glaxo Wellcome's patent for AZT, an AIDS-fighting drug, invalid.
- ^ SCC Case Information - Docket 28287 Supreme Court of Canada