The defendants moved to strike parts of the plaintiff's statement of claim, which sought damages for the delay in marketing its generic drug caused by the defendants' actions under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations.
The plaintiff claimed damages under s. 8 of the Regulations, unjust enrichment, and the Trade-marks Act after the defendants' patent was declared invalid.
The court dismissed the motion to strike these claims, finding they had a reasonable prospect of success and raised unsettled legal questions, but struck a bald claim for remedies 'otherwise available at law'.
