Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

Federal Court

 

Cour fédérale

 


Date: 20110314

Docket: T-1687-09

Citation: 2011 FC 306

Toronto, Ontario, March 14, 2011

PRESENT:     The Honourable Mr. Justice Hughes

 

BETWEEN:

 

GLAXOSMITHKLINE INC. and

BEECHAM GROUP p.l.c.

 

 

 

Applicants

 

and

 

 

 

PHARMASCIENCE INC. and

 THE MINISTER OF HEALTH

 

 

 

Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

           REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER AS TO COSTS

 

[1]               In my Reasons and Judgment dated March 1, 2011 (2011 FC 239) I set out my disposition as to costs subject to any further comments from Counsel. I have now received these comments.

 

[2]               Counsel for Pharmascience writes that an offer was made not to proceed with the cross-examination of Dr. Jurs if his affidavit was withdrawn.  That affidavit was not withdrawn and the cross-examination proceeded. GlaxoSmithKline’s Counsel writes that the offer was not a real offer, that the effort in preparing the affidavit had already been made, and that the subsequent cross-examination was in reality a fishing expedition.

 

[3]               Pharmascience’s Counsel wants costs and disbursements of the Jurs cross-examination on an increased scale plus a credit for two hours of time at the hearing before me. GlaxoSmithKline’s Counsel opposes all of that.

 

[4]               The time spent at the hearing on Dr. Jurs and his evidence, which was directed to what was termed the Log P issue, was trivial. GlaxoSmithKline did have to expend the effort and cost in preparing the affidavit. However, GlaxoSmithKline should have considered more seriously Pharmascience’s offer and later, in dealing with costs, asked for costs of the withdrawn affidavit. This did not happen. The cross-examination was conducted.

 

[5]               I will award Pharmascience the costs of conducting the cross-examination of Dr. Jurs, and related disbursements, assessed at the same scale as GlaxoSmithKline’s costs. These costs are to be set-off against costs otherwise taxed by GlaxoSmithKline.

 


ORDER

 

THIS COURT ORDERS that

 

1.         Costs of the cross-examination of Dr. Jurs, and related disbursements, are awarded to Pharmascience 0n the same scale as costs awarded to the Applicants and are to be set-off against costs taxed by the Applicants pursuant to my Judgment of March 1, 2011.

 

 

"Roger T. Hughes"

Judge

 

 

 

 

 

 

          


 


FEDERAL COURT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

DOCKET:                                          T-1687-09

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          GLAXOSMITHKLINE INC. and

                                                            BEECHAM GROUP p.l.c. v. PHARMASCIENCE

                                                            and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                    Toronto, Ontario

 

 

DATES OF HEARING:                    February 15, 2011 to February 17, 2011

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

AND JUDGMENT BY:                    HUGHES J.

 

DATED:                                             March 1, 2011

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Peter Wilcox

FOR THE APPLICANTS

 

 

Carol Hitchman

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT

PHARMASCIENCE INC.

 

No One

FOR THE FOR THE RESPONDENT

 MINISTER OF HEALTH

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Torys LLP

Toronto, Ontario

 

FOR THE APPLICANTS

 

Gardiner Roberts LLP

Toronto, Ontario

FOR THE RESPONDENT

PHARMASCIENCE INC.

 

Myles J. Kirvan

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Toronto, Ontario

FOR THE RESPONDENT

MINISTER OF HEALTH

 

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.