Davisco International Inc. v. Protose Separations Inc. et al., (1996) 18 O.T.C. 215 (GD)

• Judge: Lax, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: November 05, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1996), 18 O.T.C. 215 (GD)

Davisco Intl. v. Protose Separations (1996), 18 O.T.C. 215 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Davisco International Inc. (respondent/plaintiff) v. Protose Separations Inc., Gay Lea Foods Co-operative Limited (applicant/defendant), Michael J. Morrison c.o.b. as Morrison Technical Marketing, Alan M. Jones and Paul T. Smith

(File No. 94-CQ-57642)

Indexed As: Davisco International Inc. v. Protose Separations Inc. et al.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Lax, J.

November 7, 1996.

Summary:

Gay Lea, a dairy products producer, produced large quantities of whey as a by-product for which it had no market. Gay Lea entered into a joint venture with Protose whereby Protose, in a plant rented from Gay Lea and employing Gay Lea employees, isolated whey protein from whey supplied by Gay Lea and Gay Lea shipped the whey protein isolate to Protose's customers. Davisco owned an ion exchange processes patent and a functional protein patent. Davisco brought a patent infringement actions against Gay Lea and others. Gay Lea moved for dismissal of the claims against it.

The Ontario Court (General Division) struck out the claim against Gay Lea, where there was no genuine issue for trial.

Patents of Invention - Topic 2890

Infringement of patent - Acts constituting an infringement - Inducing infringement - See paragraph 4.

Patents of Invention - Topic 2921

Infringement of patent - Acts not constituting an infringement - General - See paragraphs 1 to 7.

Patents of Invention - Topic 3048

Infringement of patent - Persons liable - Vicarious liability - See paragraph 3.

Practice - Topic 5719

Judgments and orders - Summary judgments - To dismiss action - Grounds - No genuine issue for trial - See paragraphs 1 to 7.

Cases Noticed:

Reading & Bates Construction Co. v. Baker Energy Resources Co., Baker Marine Co. and Gaz Inter-Cité Québec Inc. (1986), 2 F.T.R. 241; 13 C.P.R.(3d) 410 (T.D.), affd. (1987), 79 N.R. 351; 18 C.P.R.(3d) 180 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

Molnlycke AB v. Proctor & Gamble Ltd. (No. 4), [1992] R.P.C. 21 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].

Beloit Canada Ltd. v. Valmet Oy (1988), 82 N.R. 235; 20 C.P.R.(3d) 1 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1988), 21 C.P.R.(3d) v (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 4].

Unilever P.L.C. v. Gillette (U.K.) Ltd., [1989] R.P.C. 583 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Domco Industries Ltd. v. Mannington Mills Inc. and Congoleum Corp. (1988), 24 F.T.R. 234; 23 C.P.R.(3d) 96 (T.D.), affd. (1990), 107 N.R. 198; 29 C.P.R.(3d) 481 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Counsel:

R.E. Dimmock and M.L. Wassenaar, for the applicant;

Paul J. Martin and David G. Allsebrook, for the respondent.

This motion was heard on November 5, 1996, before Lax, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division), who endorsed the following on the record on November 7, 1996.