PRACTICE |
Parties |
Intervention |
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Health)
T-1212-00
2001 FCT 56, Blais J.
12/2/01
13 pp.
Motion brought by Apotex Inc. seeking leave to intervene in proceeding under r. 109--Applicant seeking judicial review of Minister's decision to remove Canadian Letters Patent 1,249,969 from Patent Register administered under Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations--Whether patent including claims to medicine different than drug for which notice of compliance already issued should be included in Patent Register in respect of such drug--Apotex Ontario Corporation carrying on business principally as manufacturer of generic pharmaceutical products--Proposed intervener alleging it will bring perspective to proceeding different from that of current parties--Also alleging that, as Canada's largest generic drug manufacturer, it will be able to provide to Court informed additional perspective as to interpretation of Regulations--In determining whether to allow participation of intervener, Court will consider possibility of prejudice to parties as result of intervention--Should proposed intervener be granted intervener status herein?--In Abbott v. Canada, [2000] 3 F.C. 482 (T.D.), Prothonotary Hargrave indicated three basic conditions to be read conjunctively: (1) applicant for intervention must have interest in outcome; (2) applicant's rights will be seriously affected by outcome of litigation; and (3) applicant, as intervener, will bring different perspective to proceeding--Proposed intervener failing to show in evidence interest in outcome of proceeding, rights would be seriously affected by outcome of litigation--Having interest only in relation to interpretation of jurisprudence--Not sufficient for it to be granted intervener status--Motion dismissed--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 109--Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133.