Janssen Pharmaceutica Inc. v. Apotex Inc.
A-841-95
Décary J.A.
11/2/97
3 pp.
Stare decisis-Appeal from Gibson J.'s decision ((1995), 65 C.P.R. (3d) 56) relying on Janssen Pharmaceutica Inc. v. Novopharm Ltd. (1995), 64 C.P.R. (3d) 45 (F.C.T.D.)-Compulsory licences issued within days of each other with respect to same patents using same words in both cases-C.A. adopting MacKay J.'s reasons ((1996), 70 C.P.R. (3d) 82)-While not binding per se, reasons of judicial comity, stare decisis requiring C.A. decision be followed unless showing distinguishable material facts or previous decision of Court manifestly wrong for having overlooked statutory provision or case that ought to have been applied or followed-In these circumstances Court cannot simply contemplate possibility Commissioner may have intended to allow in case presently before it something different from what allowed in case already determined by Court-Court not persuaded Novopharm decision manifestly wrong in sense made per incuriam-Court's time, resources better spent if counsel arranging for joint hearing of applications, actions or appeals dealing with some common question of law, fact instead of each insisting in having own separate day in Court-Failure to do so impeding development of coherent case law, obliging C.A. to apply, sometimes reluctantly, principle of stare decisis.