Canada: Omnibus budget bill changes exceptions to patent infringement

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Canada: Omnibus budget bill changes exceptions to patent infringement

In the omnibus budget bill passed by the Canadian parliament on December 3 2018 were numerous amendments to Canada's IP statutes, including to sections of the Patent Act that provide exceptions to infringement.

Exception for experimental use

The changes to the Patent Act include moving the exception for experimental use under subsection 55.2(6) to its own section, 55.3, and potentially altering its scope. Section 55.3 also allows the government to enact regulations setting out factors that the court may consider, must consider or cannot consider in determining whether an act is committed for experimental purposes. The changes also provide for regulations that set out circumstances under which an act is, or is not, committed for experimental purposes.

The government has yet to announce plans for such regulations. Until then, the nature and scope of the existing exception for experimental use remains unchanged.

Exception for acts committed prior to the claim date

The changes also include replacing Section 56 of the Patent Act, expanding the scope of the infringement defence arising from acts committed prior to the asserted patent's claim date. Previously, a person purchasing, constructing or acquiring the subject matter of a claim before the claim date had the right to use or sell what had been purchased, constructed or acquired without being liable for infringement. A defence to infringement now arises when a person in good faith before the claim date, commits, or makes serious and effective preparations to commit, an act that would otherwise be infringing. This must have been done without obtaining knowledge of the claim's subject matter from the patent applicant.

The exemption to infringement also extends to future third parties. When the act includes a service, users of the service are also covered by the exemption. If committing the act resulted in an article, users or buyers of such an article are also exempted from infringement.

If the act giving rise to the exception was committed, or the preparations to commit the act were made, in the course of a business and this portion of the business is then sold, the exception to infringement is transferred and does not remain with the seller.

These changes introduce uncertainty into determining whether an allegation of infringement is justified, even though the requirement for good faith and the extension to preparatory acts are found in similar provisions in other jurisdictions. It is unclear whether the Canadian courts will look to or follow foreign jurisprudence when they are called to provide guidance regarding the meaning and scope of "serious and effective preparations" to commit an otherwise infringing act and when an act is done in good faith.

chong.jpg
daley.jpg

Jonathan Chong

Brian Daley


Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLPSuite 3800, Royal Bank Plaza, South Tower, 200 Bay Street, PO Box 84Toronto  Ontario  M5J 2Z4CanadaTel: +1 416 216 4000www.nortonrosefulbright.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article