CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionFeb 3, 2026
Entity authorityQ5251304 ↗
Source-derived summary

A patent holder in Canada has the exclusive right, privilege and liberty to making, constructing, using and selling the invention for the term of the patent, from the time the patent is granted. Any person who does any of these acts in relation to an invention without permission of the patent owner is liable for patent infringement.

When faced with an action for patent infringement, the defendant has a number of defences that they can use. These roughly fall into three categories:

Non-infringement, asserting that the defendant does not make, use or sell the patented invention;

Invalidity, asserting that the patent should not have been granted in view of prior art;

Defences based on user rights, statutory or otherwise.

Remedies in Canadian patent law generally track both common law and equitable remedies. Equitable remedies include injunctions (both final and interlocutory) and an accounting of profits. Common law remedies include damages aimed at putting the plaintiff in the position he would have occupied had the infringement not occurred.

Invalidity defences

In order to obtain a patent, an invention must be:

Allowable subject matter;

New;

Useful;

Not obvious to a person skilled in the art.

The Canadian Patent Act allows that:

59. The defendant, in any action for infringement of a patent may plead as matter of defence any fact or default which by this Act or by law renders the patent void, and the court shall take cognizance of that pleading and of the relevant facts and decide accordingly.

Editorial summary

“Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law” enters the record as open-knowledge reference entry. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Defences, remedies and Canadian can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 248-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Defences, remedies and Canadian.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Defences, remedies and Canadian provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 3, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5251304. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law primary sources, Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law archive and Defences research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Defences and remedies in Canadian patent law” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.