Your search
Results 285 resources
-
Un article de la revue Revue du notariat, diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.
-
“No one has advanced a just and logical reason why reward for service to the public should be extended to the inventor of a mechanical toy and denied to the genius whose patience, foresight, and effort have given a valuable new [discovery] to mankind” (Katopis CJ. Patents v patents: policy implications of recent patent legislation. St John’s Law Review 1997;71:329). The law around the world permits the granting of patents for drugs, medical devices, and cosmetic treatment of the human body. At the same time, patentability for a method of treatment of the same body is denied in some countries on various public policy grounds. Is there any logical justification for this distinction? Are methods of medical treatment not as vital to the health or even to the life of a patient as drugs or medical devices? Why is a cosmetic result patentable and a curative result not?
-
As many authors have already observed, intellectual property increasingly permeates ordinary people’s daily lives. And yet, this area of law, reputed for its complexity and its constant evolution prompted by frequent legislative activities and case law developments, is to a great extent portrayed as the exclusive province of specialists. Nevertheless, patent law, like other legislative activity, must not be reserved to the experts: to the contrary it should be made accessible to the ordinary jurist and, whenever possible, to the general public. Accordingly, this article, which will appear in two parts, seeks to provide a concise text, aimed at those interested in a succinct overview of the present state of Canadian patent law. In this first part, we present the normative sources of the relevant Canadian legal regime and proceed to succinctly explain what can be patented and the conditions of patentability. The second part, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Review, will deal with the scope and limits of exclusive rights, the procedure to obtain patent protection and the duration of the legal protection.
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
-
La progression des droits linguistiques au Nouveau-Brunswick dans une perspective historique globale Gatan Migneault* the evolution of The linguistic situation in New Brunswick is unique in the Canadian context. Not only does the province currently offer one of the most generous and progressive legal regimes for its French-speaking linguistic minority, this regime proceeded in the … Continued
-
This paper explores the progressive possibilities presented by two areas of private law – family law and tort law – in achieving economic justice for women who have been victims of domestic violence. The author first considers the role spousal support law might play in providing economic redress following abuse. While the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Leskun v. Leskun suggests that a court might consider the consequences of spousal misconduct when making a support order, courts remain reluctant to use support awards to address the economic impact of abuse. By contrast, tort law may appear to provide a more responsive framework for battered women. Women may use the tort of battery to seek damages to compensate for direct financial impact of the violence (e.g. medical expenses) and for indirect economic harm (e.g diminished employability). However, the challenges inherent in bringing a successful tort action mean that women rarely succeed in achieving compensation. The author concludes by considering other options (e.g. a public compensation scheme) which may be a solution for women seeking financial compensation for the harms suffered at the hands of a violent spouse.
-
For corrective justice, liability is the consequence of the parties' being correlatively situated as the doer and sufferer of an injustice, and the remedy is seen as undoing that injustice to the extent possible. Combining consideration of legal doctrine and private law theory, this article applies the framework of corrective justice to gain-based damages for torts. Within this framework, restitutionary damages ought to be available only insofar as they correspond to a constituent element in the injustice that the defendant has done to the plaintiff. The radical proposal that allows restitutionary damages for any wrongful gain is unsatisfactory because it fails to link the damages that the plaintiff receives to the normative quality of the defendant's wrong. In contrast, dealings in another's property give rise to such damages because the idea of property includes within the owner's entitlement the potential gainsfrom the property's use or alienation. Restitutionary damages should not be seen as serving a deterrent or punitive function; such a function cannot account for why the plaintiff, of all people, is entitled to the defendant's gain. Properly understood, even situations where the plaintiff's wilfulness or calculation increases the damage award fit within the framework of corrective justice. The corrective justice approach thus repudiates the notion that restitutionary damages are occasions for the promotion of social purposes extrinsic to the juridical relationship between the parties.