Glaxo Group Ltd. v. Novopharm Ltd.
A-408-98
Stone J.A.
20/11/98
3 pp.
Appeal from Trial Division order refusing to compel answers to questions categorized under "Acquiescence and Laches" and "Anticipation"-Pleadings indicating respondent relying upon defences of acquiescence and laches, anticipation-For defence of acquiescence to be made out, defendant must be able to satisfy several elements or requisites including mistaken belief as to party's legal rights, doing of some act on faith of mistaken belief: Canadian Superior Oil Ltd. et al. v. Paddon-Hughes Development Co. Ltd. et al., [1970] S.C.R. 932-Motions Judge neglecting these principles-Respondent's knowledge of rights, actions taken in asserting those alleged rights relevant to this issue at discovery stage-Questions in "Anticipation" category relevant on discovery, ought to be answered as well-Fair amount of latitude allowed on discovery provided question relevant to issues raised by pleadings; whether such question relevant, admissible at trial matter for trial judge: McKeen and Wilson Ltd. v. Gulf of Georgia Towing Co. Ltd., [1965] 2 Ex.C.R. 480-Appeal allowed with costs.