William Chalmers

Subscribe to all posts by William Chalmers

2022 Guide to Canada’s Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property Regime

Our 2022 Guide to Canada’s Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property Regime is a convenient all-in-one reference to the important legal and regulatory regimes governing pharmaceuticals in Canada. The Guide provides a detailed review of the key regimes, including: Data protection market exclusivity; The Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (PMNOC), linking generic market access to patent rights; … Continue reading

Pharma in Brief: The 2021 Year in Review

In this article, the Pharma in Brief team has curated and provided updates on the most significant topics we covered in 2021. Introduction In 2021, governments advanced major policy initiatives aimed at the COVID-19 pandemic and broader health priorities. These policy initiatives included reforms to the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB), the Patented Medicines … Continue reading

Federal Court quashes NOC in dispute over Data Protection Provisions

The Federal Court has quashed a notice of compliance (NOC) issued to Médunik Canada (Médunik) for its amifampridine product, RUZURGI, over an issue concerning data protection for another amifampridine product. The Minister provided no reasons for its issuance of the NOC, and the Court found that the Certified Tribunal Record (CTR) outlining the decision-making process … Continue reading

Data protection upheld for subsequently approved combination drugs containing new chemical entities: Federal Court finds Minister of Health’s decision to deny generic ANDS filing is reasonable

Summary On July 24, 2020, the Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review brought by Natco Pharma (Canada) Inc. (Natco) in respect of a July 26, 2019 decision (Decision) by the Minister of Health (Minister).  The Decision refused to accept Natco’s ANDS filing using Gilead Sciences Canada Inc.’s (Gilead) product DESCOVY as the Canadian … Continue reading

No leave required for experimental testing conducted prior to litigation

The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) has decided that the Federal Court’s Notice to the Profession regarding experimental testing (the Notice) does not apply to testing conducted in advance of litigation. As a result, parties wishing to lead evidence of pre-litigation testing at trial are not required to obtain leave of the Court. Background This … Continue reading

Ontario implements regulatory changes to streamline drug formulary listing and reduce government payments to pharmacies

The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (the Ministry) has amended Regulations made under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act (ODBA) and the Ontario Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act (DIDFA). The new Regulations are substantially similar to those originally proposed (as we reported). The intended effect of the amendments is to reduce technical requirements … Continue reading

Ontario reduces restrictions on ordinary commercial term benefits and private label products

The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (the Ministry) introduced changes to regulations (collectively, the Regulations) made under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act (ODBA) and the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act (DIDFA). These changes will remove the financial caps on ordinary commercial term (OCT) payments made by drug manufacturers to pharmacies and allow … Continue reading

Ontario consults on changes to streamline drug formulary listing and reduce government payments to pharmacies

The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (the Ministry) has proposed draft amendments to Regulations made under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act (ODBA) and the Ontario Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act. The proposed changes are intended to reduce technical requirements for listing a product on the Ontario formulary and align policies with industry … Continue reading

Stockpiling generic manufacturers may be liable for direct infringement of “composition for a use” claims

The Federal Court has found that it is reasonably arguable that a claim for “a composition for use in the treatment of a disorder” may be directly infringed through the importation, manufacture and stockpiling of the composition. The Court distinguished these claims from pure “use of a composition for a treatment” claims, which can only … Continue reading
LexBlog