Patent litigation settlement agreement only prohibits inducement in Canada
The Procter & Gamble Company, Procter & Gamble Inc. v. BrushPoint Innovations Inc., 2013 ONSC 5747

A term in a settlement agreement following previous patent litigation has been found to be clear and unambiguous. The agreement was held to prevent BrushPoint, or someone induced by BrushPoint, from dealing with the products in Canada in contravention of Procter & Gamble’s patents. As a result, BrushPoint was found to have not breached the covenant regarding products made, shipped and sold in the USA.

Wording from the Agreement: “not make, construct, use, or sell, or induce others to make, construct, use or sell the Products, in Canada, while any of the Patents are in force”.

Other Industry News

Health Canada has published a Guidance Document: Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report (PBRER) International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) Topic E2C(R2).


Chantal Saunders

Beverley Moore

Adrian J. Howard


Intellectual Property