{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029545454545454545, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013636363636363636, 'mean_word_length': 5.24822695035461, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Bill C-30: who wins and who loses in Canada’s pharmaceutical patent battles?

Following lengthy negotiations with the European Union (EU), Canada enacted Bill C-30 to implement the ‘Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement’ in 2016 [1]. A particularly important part of that legislation involved the treatment of pharmaceutical exclusivity and the process of litigation between patentees and generic firms. This paper reviews the likely impact of C-30 and its accompanying regulations on the pharmaceutical marketplace in Canada. There are two key changes, with other downstream effects. First, Canada has now implemented a system of ‘Certificates of Supplementary Protection’ (CSPs) that will provide for effective patent extension of up to 2 years for one qualifying patent for each product. Second, the legal process for generic firms to enter the market has been simplified.