Canada: Encouraging cost award trend emerging
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Canada: Encouraging cost award trend emerging

Enforcement of IP rights can sometimes culminate in litigation. In Canada, as in most jurisdictions, litigation related to IP is rarely inexpensive, with significant costs incurred for both counsel fees and for disbursements as varied as travel, scientific testing and the engagement of expert witnesses. Fortunately, in Canada successful parties are generally entitled to compensation for the costs of bringing their case. Indeed, most IP litigation in Canada occurs in the Federal Courts which have recently evinced an increasing willingness to ensure the adequacy of that compensation even in the most complex cases.

Canada's various courts usually provide some scheme for awarding costs. In the Federal Courts, cost awards include a component compensating for a portion of counsel fees and a component for reasonable and necessary disbursements. The fee component usually follows a tariff which sets out a range of set amounts for particular litigation activities and is intended to provide predictability while also accommodating varying degrees of case complexity. The fixed amounts are usually lower than actual costs and can be viewed as a compromise between compensating a successful party and not unduly burdening the other side.

The court is not, however, bound to apply the tariff and can choose to substitute a lump sum award proportionate to the counsel fees actually incurred by the prevailing party. Nonetheless, the tariff has typically been followed historically, with the complexity of cases such as those involving patents reflected in an award tending toward the higher end of the tariff.

Recently, however, a trend appears to be emerging where the Federal Court is shifting towards awarding lump sum costs that are higher than provided for under the tariff. The recent case of The Dow Chemical Company v Nova Chemical Corporation offers a prime example.

In that case, Dow alleged that the manufacture of certain polymers by Nova infringed a patent held by Dow. Nova counterclaimed alleging the patent was invalid. Ultimately, the court held that Dow's patent was both valid and infringed and that Dow was therefore entitled to remedies and an award of costs. In determining the latter, the Court considered the tariff but found that even its highest end would be "totally inadequate" in the circumstances of the case. The Court thus declined to follow the tariff and instead awarded Dow costs of C$6.5 million ($5 million), including a lump sum of C$2.9 million for legal fees and a further C$3.6 million for reasonable and necessary disbursements including certain in-house testing. The fee award was particularly significant and amounted to approximately 30% of Dow's actual counsel fees. The cost award was upheld on appeal.

This emerging trend is encouraging and may be an indication of a new willingness on the part of Canada's courts to provide adequate compensation for costs incurred by successful litigants in complex litigation such as the enforcement of IP rights.

Neil L Padgett


Smart & Biggar/ Fetherstonhaugh55 Metcalfe Street Suite 900PO Box 2999 Station DOttawa ON  K1P 5Y6Tel: 613 232 2486Fax: 613 232 8440 ottawa@smart-biggar.cawww.smart-biggar.ca

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

An intimate understanding of a client’s sector is essential to winning new business, a survey of over 28,000 corporate counsel reveals
Counsel say a Federal Circuit ruling on the obviousness test for design patents may increase the time IP owners spend defending their rights
While the INTA Annual Meeting is over for another year, here are a few things Managing IP learned after attending IP’s biggest party
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Four sources reveal which tools they have been using – or building – to help them with a range of tasks from invention generation to claim sufficiency
Managing IP reveals Wednesday's highlights, including a discussion on how AI is helping lawyers improve their "gut instinct" trademark decisions
Managing IP reveals Tuesday’s highlights, including an illuminating discussion celebrating women in the workplace and the challenges that remain
Dana Northcott, INTA’s 2024 president and associate general counsel for Amazon's IP team, talks about her work for the association
Managing IP reveals highlights from the INTA Annual Meeting, including law firms’ diversity and ESG concerns and a new beginning for a Chinese firm
Firms with a broad geographic reach are more likely to win work, especially from global companies with high turnovers, according to survey data of nearly 29,000 corporate counsel
Gift this article