The Patentability of Pharmaceutical Dosage Regimes in Canada
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
The Patentability of Pharmaceutical Dosage Regimes in Canada
Issue: Volume 26 no 2
Author(s): David E. Schwartz and Gunars A. Gaikis
Abstract:
In its 1974 decision in Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), the Supreme Court of Canada held that methods of medical treatment constituted unpatentable subject matter. The Court largely based its decision on what was then s. 41 of the Patent Act, a provision repealed in 1991. Whether the prohibition on patenting methods of medical treatment remains justified under the current Patent Act has generally received little attention, because it has been possible to claim most inventions in this area, which typically relate to new applications for medicines, as a use rather than a method. However, a number of recent Canadian court decisions have indicated that patent claims directed to the use of pharmaceutical products in accordance with a dosage regime may contravene the method of treatment prohibition. This is, perhaps, surprising in view of the patentability of such claims in the European Patent Office, despite the express statutory prohibition on patenting methods of medical treatment under the European Patent Convention. This article reviews the history of the method of treatment prohibition in Canada and explores its underlying rationale. The patentability of methods of medical treatment, particularly with respect to pharmaceutical dosage regimes, is compared among Canada, the United States, and Europe. Suggested practices for prosecution of Canadian patent applications in this field are provided.
