PRACTICE |
Merck & Co., Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Health)
T-568-03
2003 FC 1511, Heneghan J.
22/12/03
6 pp.
Apotex Inc. (Apotex) appeals from Prothonotary's order--Order resulted from motion brought by applicants to strike out all or part of 10 of 14 affidavits filed by Apotex in this proceeding--Apotex submitted Prothonotary erred in law by failing to follow clear case law with respect to striking affidavits on interlocutory basis and to interpreting Canada Evidence Act, s. 7 as meaning party to proceeding limited to five expert witnesses in total, as opposed to five expert witnesses per issue--Prothonotary erred in law by ignoring and failing to follow Eli Lilly and Co. v. Novopharm Ltd. (1997), 73 C.P.R. (3d) 371 (F.C.T.D.)--No good reason why Prothonotary should not have followed and applied Eli Lilly--Appeal allowed--Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-5, s. 7.