On Monday the SCC delivered judgment orally, dismissing the appeal in Ramipril s 8:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE — We are all of the view to dismiss the appeal substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Court of Appeal.The appeal is dismissed with costs.
My posts on the FCA decision are here, here and here; posts on the FC decision are here and here, as well as here in the related Teva action.
The companion Teva case, which was not appealed to the SCC, also dealt with assessment of damages under s 8: 2014 FCA 67 var’g 2012 FC 552, with an additional blog post here relating to an issue raised solely in Teva. See also the related litigation challenging the validity of s 8: 2014 FCA 69 blogged here, aff’g 2012 FC 551 here.