Canada: Agreement To Assign Patents Subject To Act

The Federal Court of Appeal unanimously held that an assignment of a patent may constitute an agreement or arrangement which results in an undue lessening of competition contrary to s. 45 of the Competition Act.

In June, 1997, Eli Lilly and Company and Eli Lilly Canada Inc. (collectively, "Lilly") filed a statement of claim alleging that Apotex Inc. ("Apotex") had infringed several of its patents, including four patents that had previously been assigned to it by Shionogi & Co. Ltd. ("Shionogi") (the "Shionogi Patents"). Each of the Shionogi Patents described and claimed processes suitable for making intermediates which could be converted to the antibiotic, cefaclor, using other non-infringing processes.

Section 45

In 2001, Apotex amended its statement of defence and counterclaim to argue that the assignment of the Shionogi Patents to Lilly violated s. 45 of the Competition Act (the "Act"), which prohibits agreements that prevent or lessen competition unduly. Apotex requested a declaration that the Shionogi Patents were "invalid, void, unenforceable and of no force or effect." It sought damages under subs. 36(1) of the Act. Interestingly, the last of the Shionogi Patents had expired in 2000, and the patent for cefaclor had expired in 1994.

Once Apotex initiated its counterclaim, Lilly and Shionogi brought a series of motions for summary judgment which wound their way through the Federal Court and then the Federal Court of Appeal (the "FCA") through various appeals. Throughout these proceedings, Lilly and Shionogi argued that s. 45 of the Act could not apply as a matter of law to an assignment of patent rights because the Patent Act specifically authorizes holders of patents to assign such rights.

Lilly and Shionogi relied on the FCA's decision in Molnlycke AB v. Kimberly-Clark of Canada Ltd. ("Molnlycke") in which the FCA struck out allegations of anti-competitive activity on the basis that the assignment of a patent involves nothing more than the legitimate exercise of the patentee's monopoly.

Intervenor Status

The Commissioner of Competition (the "Commissioner") applied for and was granted leave to intervene in these proceedings. Her ability to administer the Act in respect of patent rights could be affected by the outcome of the case. In her materials, the Commissioner disagreed with Justice Hugessen's assertion that his decision was consistent with the Competition Bureau's Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (the "IPEGs").

Prior Decisions

Summary Judgment

Initially, a Prothonotary concluded that Molnlycke was distinguishable from the present case in that it involved a different "factual paradigm." It allowed Apotex's claim to proceed. Justice Hugessen disagreed. Following Molnlycke, he concluded that

[the] allegation that Shionogi and Lilly entered into the agreement to assign the Shionogi Patents . . . for the purpose and with the effect of allowing Lilly to continue to have a monopoly of the Canadian market for cefaclor is simply not . .. an allegation of illegal conduct. Everyone who obtains a patent, whether by issue or by assignment, does so for the purpose of obtaining a monopoly which, by definition, is a lessening of competition. That monopoly is one that is legally sanctioned and simply cannot, as a matter of law, result in the lessening of competition being 'undue' during the life of the patent.

Accordingly, Justice Hugessen held that Apotex's counterclaim did not state a cause of action. He granted summary judgment in favour of Lilly and Shionogi.

Reversal On Appeal

On November 2, 2005 the FCA reversed Justice Hugessen's decision, finding the earlier decision in Molnlycke distinguishable from the present case:

[i]n the case of Molnlycke, there was a single supplier lawfully .entitled to sell. the subject of the patent prior to the patent being ssigned. The assignment merely transferred the patent to another company. The only effect of the assignment was that a different company could sue the defendant for infringement. There was no change in the number of patent-holders before and after the assignment.

By contrast, before the assignment of the Shionogi Patents, there were two companies with commercially viable processes for making cefaclor- namely, Shionogi and Lilly. After the assignment, there was only one such company.

Application Of Act

The FCA also pointed out that, in Molnlycke, it had found

that, in order to provide scope for the statutory monopolies - granted by the Patent Act to operate, Parliament must have intended that 'undue impairment of competition cannot be inferred from evidence of the exercise of [patent] rights alone.' Where, however, there is evidence of something more than the mere exercise of patent rights that may affect competition in the relevant market, Molnlyck does not purport to completely preclude application of the [Act].

No Violation

The FCA remanded the matter to Justice Hugessen, who found that the assignment in question did not involve something more than the mere exercise of intellectual property rights; once again, he struck out Apotex's counterclaim.

Federal Court Of Appeal

On Apotex's further appeal, the FCA concluded that Justice Hugessen had erred in law and that Apotex's counterclaim should proceed. The FCA held that the Patent Act does not immunize an agreement to assign a patent from s. 45 of the Act when the assignment increases the assignee's market power in excess of that inherent in the patent rights assigned.

It distinguished Molnlycke, finding that the combination of the assignment of the Shionogi Patents, together with Lilly's already existing ownership of patents for the other commercially viable methods of production for cefaclor, led to a lessening of competition and potentially invoked the application of s. 45.

The FCA noted that: this interpretation of . . . the Patent Act enables it and section 45 of the [Act] to operate harmoniously in accordance with the ordinary meaning of the statutory language of the provisions.

Exemptions And Purpose

The court noted that s. 45 of the Act does not contain any express exception for the exercise of patent rights, in contrast with other provisions of the Act which contain such an exemption. The FCA also noted that

an interpretation of [the Patent Act] which does not immunize the assignment of patents from section 45 when it lessens competition is consistent with the purpose of the [Act].

That purpose, as stated in section 1.1, is to "maintain and encourage" competition. The FCA also noted that this interpretation of the Patent Act is consistent with the enforcement approach set out in the IPEGs.

Meaning Of "Undue"

Alternatively, Lilly and Shionogi argued that, even if s. 45 could apply in theory, it did not apply in practice because the assignment did not lessen competition unduly on the facts of the case. The FCA dismissed this argument; even Justice Hugessen had found at least a lessening of competition in the relevant market on the facts. The FCA stated that the question of whether this lessening of competition was "undue" should be decided at trial.

Limitations And Damages

The FCA also left for resolution at trial the particular issues of whether (i) Apotex's claims were in fact statute-barred because they were beyond the limitation period set out in s. 36 of the Act; and (ii) Apotex had sustained any actual damages, which is another pre-condition for a claim under s. 36.

Even though the assignment took place in 1995, the FCA characterized the conduct as going on "as long as the assignment had competition-lessening effect." This approach, while offered as obiter, differs from the judicial treatment of limitation periods for mergers or other analogous events which typically are viewed as complete once implemented.


The FCA's decision that the Patent Act cannot, in all circumstances, preclude the application of the Competition Act is consistent with the IPEGs and with other international jurisprudence regarding the interplay between antitrust regulation and intellectual property rights.

That said, the decision underscores the careful consideration which must be afforded to competition law issues when licenses or patents are assigned. The assignment of a patent right could land the parties in the middle of an alleged criminal conspiracy, raising the prospect of prosecution and follow- on civil actions.

References: Apotex Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co., (November 2, 2005) Doc. A-579-04 (F.C .A.); Molnlycke AB v. Kimberly-Clark of Canada Ltd. (1991), 36 C.P.R. (3d) 493

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.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
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
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions