Canada: Patents And Competition

Last Updated: July 15 2005
Article by Mark C. Katz and Elisa K. Kearney

The Federal Court of Appeal is hearing a seminal case dealing with the interface between IP and competiton law.

As is the case with other competition enforcement agencies, the Canadian Competition Bureau (the Bureau) has had to consider the appropriateness of applying the strictures of competition law to the exercise of intellectual property rights. The challenge for enforcement authorities like the Bureau is to prevent anticompetitive conduct without interfering with the legitimate exercise of these IP rights.

According to its Intellectual Property Guidelines (the IP Guidelines), the Bureau will apply the general provisions of the Competition Act only to conduct that involves something more than the "mere exercise" of an IP right. However, as an ongoing case in Canada’s Federal Court demonstrates, there is often disagreement about what conduct goes beyond the "mere exercise" of an IP right and thus crosses the boundary into anticompetitive behaviour.

Eli Lilly v Apotex

The case in which this issue has been raised, Eli Lilly and Co v Apotex Inc, originally began in 1997 when Eli Lilly filed a statement of claim in the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division (the Trial Division), alleging that Apotex had infringed several of its patents, including four patents that had been assigned to Lilly by Shionogi and Company. Each of the Shionogi patents described and claimed processes suitable for making intermediates which could be converted to the antibiotic cefaclor using non-infringing processes.

In its statement of defence, Apotex claimed that the assignment of the Shionogi patents to Lilly violated section 45 of the Competition Act, which prohibits agreements that prevent or lessen competition unduly. Apotex alleged that the Shionogi patents were assigned as part of an agreement between Shionogi and Lilly to preserve Lilly’s monopoly over the manufacture and sale of cefaclor in Canada by preventing other manufacturers from entering the Canadian market with this product. Apotex also counterclaimed for damages and a declaration that the Shionogi patents were "invalid, void, unenforceable and of no force or effect".

Lilly and Shionogi brought motions to strike out certain paragraphs of Apotex’s statement of defence and counterclaim, including the paragraphs relating to section 45. In this last regard, they relied on a decision of the Federal Court of Appeal (the FCA) in which the court had struck down certain allegations of anticompetitive conduct relating to the assignment of a patent on the grounds that this involved nothing more than the legitimate exercise of the patent holder’s IP rights.

At first instance, a prothonotary (a non-judicial officer of the Federal Court appointed to consider certain preliminary motions) concluded that the FCA decision was distinguishable on its facts, and allowed Apotex’s claims under section 45 to proceed. However, on appeal, a judge of the Trial Division overruled the prothonotary and held that the FCA precedent was binding. The Trial Division judge held that a patent provides its holder with a "legally sanctioned" monopoly under Canada’s Patent Act and thus the assignment of a patent right "simply cannot, as a matter of law, result in the lessening of competition being ‘undue’ during the life of the patent".

On further appeal, the FCA reversed the Trial Division judge’s decision. The FCA agreed with the prothonotary that its earlier judgement was indeed distinguishable on its facts and did not govern in this instance. The FCA stated that, whereas in its earlier decision the patent assignment in question had not resulted in a reduction in competitors, the arrangement between Lilly and Shionogi in the instant case meant that Lilly had become the only company capable of manufacturing and selling cefaclor in Canada. The FCA held that this result could be construed as "evidence of something more than the mere exercise of patent rights" and therefore it was appropriate to allow Apotex’s claim of anticompetitive conduct to proceed. The FCA remanded the case back to the Trial Division and directed the judge to consider whether the facts of the case as pleaded could be sufficient to prove that Lilly and Shionogi had contravened section 45 of the Competition Act.

On remand, the Trial Division judge held once more that there was no evidence of an unlawful agreement under section 45. In language that seemed inconsistent with the FCA’s decision, the judge reiterated his view that the assignment of a patent is a transaction which has been specifically authorised by parliament under the Patent Act and thus is presumptively legal, regardless of the number of parties involved. The judge also asserted that his finding was entirely consistent with the Bureau’s IP Guidelines.

The Bureau intervenes

Not surprisingly, Apotex has appealed to the FCA yet again. This time, however, the Bureau has also sought leave to intervene in the appeal, arguing that the Trial Division judge’s decision would cause "great mischief " if upheld.

Patents and competition / Cars

In its written submissions seeking leave to intervene, the Bureau argued that the Trial Division judge’s approach is, in fact, inconsistent with the IP Guidelines. For example, the IP Guidelines specifically state that where "an IP owner licenses, transfers or sells the IP to a firm or a group of firms that would have been actual or potential competitors without the arrangement, and if this agreement creates, enhances or maintains market power, the Bureau may seek to challenge the arrangement under the appropriate section of the Competition Act". The Bureau argued that the Trial Division judge’s decision lacks support in legal precedent and public policy as well.

The Bureau’s application to intervene was granted by the FCA on 27 May 2005. The FCA held that the Bureau had standing to intervene because its ability to administer the Competition Act in respect of patent rights may be affected by the outcome of the case. The FCA also held that the relationship between the Patent Act and the Competition Act involves a question of statutory interpretation that is justiciable and of public interest.

The appeal is expected to be heard sometime before the end of this year.


The Eli Lilly case is a paradigmatic example of a situation in which the courts – and the Bureau – must contend with defining the parameters of the legitimate use of IP rights.

The same exercise is taking place in other jurisdictions as well. In both the United States and the EU, for example, one of the issues that has generated considerable litigation (and disagreement) is when will a dominant firm’s refusal to license IP amount to unlawful monopolisation/abuse of dominance. It is clear in both jurisdictions that the refusal to grant a licence is not in itself unlawful and that "something more" (the US term) or "exceptional circumstances" (the EU term) is – or are – required to contravene the law. What remains unsettled, however, is when and in what context the conditions for illegality will be satisfied (see eg In re Independent Services Organization Antitrust Litigation in the US and the Magill and IMS Health decisions in the EU).

The same considerations lie at the heart of the Eli Lilly case. The concern with the Trial Division’s decision is that it would appear to insulate patent licensing agreements from scrutiny under the Competition Act in all circumstances. As argued by the Bureau, this absolutist approach seems to go beyond accepted principles in Canada (and elsewhere) and could provide patent holders with carte blanche to engage in abusive and anticompetitive behaviour when exercising their IP rights.


Competition Bureau, Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines,

Decisions of the Trial Division in Eli Lilly and Co v Apotex Inc are available at; decisions of the FCA in Apotex Inc v Eli Lilly and Co are available at

In re Independent Services Organization Antitrust Litigation, 2000 US App LEXIS 2303 (DC Cir).

Radio Telefis Eireann & Others v The Commission ("Magill"), Case C-241/91 1995 ECR I-743.

IMS Health Gmbh & Co. OHG v. NDC Health Gmbh & Co. KG, Case T- 184/01 - 2002 ECR II-3193.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Mark C. Katz
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.