Tennessee Eastman Co. et al. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Judge | Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Hall, Emmett Matthew; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Laskin, Bora |
| Date | 22 December 1972 |
| Citation | [1974] SCR 111,1972 CanLII 167 (SCC),33 DLR (3d) 459,8 CPR (2d) 202 |
| Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
56 practice notes
-
Monsanto Canada Inc. et al. v. Schmeiser et al., (2004) 320 N.R. 201 (SCC)
...of Patents, [1982] 1 F.C. 845; 38 N.R. 299 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 133]. Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111, refd to. [para. 133]. State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group Inc. (1998), 149 F.3d 1368 (F.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 133]. A......
-
Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), 2002 SCC 76
...Bruning, [1964] S.C.R. 49; Lawson v. Commissioner of Patents (1970), 62 C.P.R. 101; Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111; Re Application of Abitibi Co. (1982), 62 C.P.R. (2d) 81; Pioneer Hi‑Bred Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1623, a......
-
Table of Cases
...253, 258 Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111 .......... 179 Teva Canada Innovation v Canada (Attorney General), 2013 FC 448...............305 Teva Canada Limited v Canada (Health), 2011 FC 507, af’d 2012 FCA 106.....................................................
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2018 FC 259
...The prohibition against patenting a method of medical treatment originates with Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111, 33 DLR (3d) 459, wherein the Supreme Court of Canada determined that a method of surgical bonding of body tissues with an adhesive compositio......
Request a trial to view additional results
41 cases
-
Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), 2002 SCC 76
...Bruning, [1964] S.C.R. 49; Lawson v. Commissioner of Patents (1970), 62 C.P.R. 101; Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111; Re Application of Abitibi Co. (1982), 62 C.P.R. (2d) 81; Pioneer Hi‑Bred Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1623, a......
-
Monsanto Canada Inc. et al. v. Schmeiser et al., (2004) 320 N.R. 201 (SCC)
...of Patents, [1982] 1 F.C. 845; 38 N.R. 299 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 133]. Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111, refd to. [para. 133]. State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group Inc. (1998), 149 F.3d 1368 (F.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 133]. A......
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2018 FC 259
...The prohibition against patenting a method of medical treatment originates with Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111, 33 DLR (3d) 459, wherein the Supreme Court of Canada determined that a method of surgical bonding of body tissues with an adhesive compositio......
-
Bayer Inc. et al. v. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Co. et al., (2015) 474 N.R. 311 (FCA)
...1; 2013 FC 985, affd. (2014), 459 N.R 17; 2014 FCA 17, refd to. [para. 101]. Tennessee Eastman Co. et al. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111; 33 D.L.R.(3d) 459, refd to. [para. Authors and Works Noticed: Fox, Harold G., The Canadian Law and Practice Relating to Letters Patent for......
Request a trial to view additional results
8 firm's commentaries
-
Pharmaceutical Patents And Canada's Prohibition On Patenting Methods Of Medical Treatment: A Predictable Pattern To Follow?
...(Commissioner of Patents) (1970), [1970] Ex CJ No 13, and expanded upon by Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Canada (Commissioner of Patents), [1974] SCR 111 (affirming [1970] Ex CJ No 14), shortly thereafter. The Supreme Court in Tennessee Eastman justified its endorsement of the prohibition on......
-
Medical Treatment vs. Medical Use: The Shifting Ground Of Patentable Subject Matter In Canada
...exclusion established under an old compulsory licensing regime (Tennessee Eastman Co. et al. v Commissioner of Patents, (1972), 8 C.P.R. (2d) 202 (S.C.C.)). The exclusion has persisted in Canadian law, despite the regime no longer being in force. Separately, the Supreme Court has considered......
-
Federal Court Revisits The Issue Of Medical Uses
...patented and monopolized, can be traced back to the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Tennessee Eastman Co v Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111 ("Tennessee Eastman"). The Court found that the principle in Tennessee Eastman has been applied consistently by the courts to the facts be......
-
Canadian Appeal Court Itching To Consider Patented Medical Treatments
...methods of medical treatment are not patentable... The provenance of this is Tennessee Eastman Co. et al. v. Commissioner of Patents, [1974] S.C.R. 111, 33 D.L.R. (3d) 459, a decision based on former subsection 41(1) of the Patent Act, now repealed. In his blog, "Sufficient Description," Pr......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...253, 258 Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Commissioner of Patents, [1974] SCR 111 .......... 179 Teva Canada Innovation v Canada (Attorney General), 2013 FC 448...............305 Teva Canada Limited v Canada (Health), 2011 FC 507, af’d 2012 FCA 106.....................................................
-
Patenting of Pharmaceutical Products
...College ]. 20 Canada (Attorney General) v Amazon.com, Inc , 2011 FCA 328. 21 Tennessee Eastman Co et al v Commissioner of Patents , [1974] SCR 111. Although Canadian law continues to bar the patenting of so-called methods of medical treatment, determining whether a patent is invalid on this......
-
Why Stop Now? The Availability of Business Method Patents in Canada
...the more recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Monsanto Canada 74 Ibid . at 54. 75 Tennessee Eastman v. Canada (1972), [1974] S.C.R. 111, 8 C.P.R. (2d) 202. 76 Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) [2000] 4 F.C. 528, 7 C.P.R. (4th) 1 (F.C.A.) at para. 23, rev’d [20......
-
Appendix A: Moot Problem from the 2009-2010 Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot
...against the patentability of all methods of medical treatment (see, for example, Tennessee Eastman Co. v. Commissioner of Patents , [1974] S.C.R. 111), claim 1 of the ‘007 Patent is invalid. As all the other claims of the ‘007 Patent depend from claim 1, the patent is invalid in its entiret......
Request a trial to view additional results