European Union

Canada

IP Enforcement

1. Do Canada's provisions for interlocutory (including interim) relief permit "effective action" by holders of a patent, trademark or copyright interest to preserve and protect those interests in the short term (Articles 41.1 and 50 of the TRIPS Agreement)? Is it not accurate to state that the existing statutory and/or common law standard for obtaining interlocutory relief, as interpreted by the relevant Canadian courts, makes it extremely difficult for patent owners, in particular, to obtain provisional measures protecting their property interests? If this is the case, how does Canada's existing law comply with its obligation to provide remedies which are "expeditious" and which deter further infringements?

The superior courts of the provinces, as well as the Federal Court, have authority to order the effective provisional measures contemplated in Articles 41.1 and 50 of the TRIPS Agreement. In the interests of justice, these measures are exceptional and require proof of irreparable harm in order to dispose, at an interim or interlocutory stage, of issues which would normally not be settled until trial.