Patently Absurd, Episode 18: Quarter-century case law finale, double patenting, patentable subject matter, and claims broader

Join Torys' intellectual property lawyers for an informal discussion on all aspects of patent law. We’ll be analyzing the old, the new—and most definitely the absurd—in candid conversation, all while taking questions from the audience and welcoming special guests along the way.

Patently Absurd, Episode 18: Quarter-century case law finale, double patenting, patentable subject matter, and claims broader

In our last Patently Absurd episode for 2025, Niki and Andy will wrap up their discussion of the most influential patent cases of the past 25 years. In this session, we head to the finals where the four leading cases (as per your vote) will square off. If you join us, you will be able to vote for the case will crown as the ultimate SCC patent decision of the 21^st century so far! As a reminder, our four contenders are (in alphabetical order):

• Apotex Inc v Wellcome (“AZT”) (Patent utility)
• Free World Trust/Whirlpool (Claim Construction)
• Monsanto v Schmeiser (Patent use)
• Sanofi-Aventis (Obviousness)

Niki and Andy will also discuss some recent case law developments on the Canadian doctrine of double patenting and patentable subject matter. And finally, they will be joined by Torys IP litigation colleague Alex Peterson to discuss the concept of claims broader, an issue that increasingly crops up in cases.

Something Old: Quarter-century case law review: Final Four and winner selection 
Something New: Case law updates (double patenting and patentable subject matter)
Something Borrowed: Claims broader in Canadian patent law

This session will be presented in English.

Time: 9:00 – 10:00 a.m. ET Presentation
8:45 a.m. ET Webinar opens

Ontario: This program is eligible for 60 Substantive minutes.

Be sure to check out the other sessions in this series over at torys.com/webinars.