Canada Adopts the Anticipated Profits Approach for Calculating a Reasonable Royalty Rate
The Canadian Intellectual Property Review (CIPR) is a double-blind peer reviewed journal. It is sent to over 1,800 IPIC members at no cost and can be purchased by non-members for a fee. If you would like to browse the articles included in the CIPR, please consult our database below.
Any author, member or non-member can submit an article for consideration in the CIPR. The CIPR Editorial Board welcomes both short pieces (2,000 to 5,000 words) that may be included in the Notes section of the issue or longer, more in-depth articles. The maximum length of articles, including references, is 20,000 words. Articles may be submitted in French or English. Each article should be accompanied by a 150-word abstract.
All submissions undergo a double-blind review process: the reviewers are not given the authors' identities and the identities of the reviewers are shielded from the authors. Additionally, articles submitted must be original and must not have been previously published elsewhere.
If you would like to submit an article for an upcoming issue of the CIPR please contact admin@ipic.ca.
Canadian Intellectual Property Review
Share
Canada Adopts the Anticipated Profits Approach for Calculating a Reasonable Royalty Rate
Issue: Volume 24 no 2
Author(s): Michael Crichton
Abstract:
Under the Patent Act, a successful plaintiff may be entitled to compensation arising from two distinct periods: (1) after patent grant; and (2) before patent grant, but after publication. With respect to the former, courts have quantified and awarded damages on several bases, including lost profits of the plaintiff and a reasonable royalty. With respect to the latter, s. 55(2) of the Patent Act contemplates “reasonable compensation” as the liability of an infringer. In a recent decision by the Federal Court, the phrase “reasonable compensation” was equated with “reasonable royalty.” To determine a “reasonable royalty,” the court will construct a hypothetical negotiation, and assess various factors to determine the appropriate amount of a hypothetical licensee’s—that is, an infringer’s—anticipated profits that should be paid to the hypothetical licensor—that is, the plaintiff—as a result of the patent infringement.
