Expertise
-
Practice Areas:
- Bar Admissions:
- Education:
- Queen's University (2018) JD
- University of Toronto (2014) MASc (Industrial Engineering)
- University of Toronto (2012) BASc (Industrial Engineering)
Details
- Bio
- Cases
- Associations
- Blog Posts
- News & Media
Jacqueline Chan
is a lawyer at Lenczner Slaght.
Jacqueline's practice encompasses a broad range of intellectual property litigation, including technology, pharmaceutical and biologics patents.
Prior to joining Lenczner Slaght, Jacqueline summered and articled at a prominent civil litigation boutique, specializing in insurance and medical negligence matters. She has appeared before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, as well as administrative tribunals.
She is a graduate of the Faculty of Law at Queen’s University, where she competed in the national Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot, and was awarded the Bereskin & Parr LLP Prize for highest-standing in Patent Law and the Queen’s Law Prize in Advanced Torts. While in law school, she also volunteered as a student caseworker at Queen's Legal Aid, providing litigation services to low-income residents in Kingston, Ontario.
Jacqueline holds a Bachelor of Applied Science and a Master of Applied Science in Industrial Engineering from the University of Toronto. Prior to law school, she worked as an analyst at both a major teaching hospital and global technology consulting firm.
-
Teva Canada v Mylan Pharmaceuticals
Action pursuant to the PM(NOC) Regulations relating to COPAXONE (glatiramer acetate injection), an immunomodulator medication used to treat multiple sclerosis.
-
Counsel to Crosslinx Transit Solutions Constructors in an application against Metrolinx and Ontario Infrastructure (HMQE) in relation to HMQE’s failure to declare an emergency as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Crosslinx is a design and construction consortium established to deliver and maintain the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, the second largest Canadian transit infrastructure project. We successfully resisted a motion to stay and succeeded entirely on the application to obtain contractual relief due to the pandemic. This is notable as it may have broader implications for other P3 Projects across the province of Ontario.
-
First Hamilton Holdings Inc et al v Laurentian Bank Securities et al
Counsel to the Respondent Laurentian Bank Securities in opposing an application for an interim injunction with respect to the Applicants’ margin accounts brought at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in North America.
-
York University v Access Copyright
Counsel to the interveners Authors Alliance and Ariel Katz in an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada addressing the issue of fair dealing and the question of whether tariffs set by the Copyright Board are mandatory.
-
Rovi Guides and TiVo Solutions v Bell Canada
Counsel to TiVo Solutions and its subsidiary Rovi Guides in a patent infringement action, involving patents relating to interactive television program guides, DVR technology, and related technologies.
-
Rovi Guides and TiVo Solutions v Telus Corporation
Counsel to TiVo Solutions and its subsidiary Rovi Guides in a patent infringement action, involving patents relating to interactive television program guides, DVR technology, and related technologies.
-
Rovi Guides and TiVo Solutions v Videotron
Counsel to TiVo Solutions and its subsidiary Rovi Guides in a patent infringement action, involving patents relating to interactive television program guides, DVR technology, and related technologies.
-
The Advocates' Society
-
Canadian Bar Association
-
Ontario Bar Association
-
Young Women in Law
-
In the last case heard before her retirement from the Supreme Court of Canada, and writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Rosalie Abella affirmed the Federal Court of Appeal’s ruling that tariffs set by the Copyright Board are not mandatory (York University v Access Copyright). Justice Abella also rejected the FCA’s narrow approach to fair dealing and reiterated the nature of fair dealing as a user’s right, to be approached in the educational context from a student’s perspective and not exclusively from the institutional perspective.
-
Copyright holders in Canada have scored a major victory in the fight against online piracy. The Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) in Teksavvy Solutions Inc v Bell Media Inc recently affirmed that site blocking injunctions may be ordered against Internet Service Providers (or ISPs), even as third parties to a copyright infringement action.
-
The Federal Court of Appeal Clarifies the “Obvious to Try” Test
The Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) has clarified the extent of flexibility afforded when undertaking the “Obvious to Try” test in Amgen v Pfizer, 2020 FCA 188. Although it ultimately cautioned against a segmented approach, the FCA did not dismiss the possibility that experimental steps could be assessed individually in order to make conclusions about an experiment as a whole, particularly with respect to the Self-Evident and Extent of Effort factors of the test. Despite agreeing that the Federal Court (“FC”) could have been more expansive and all-embracing in its overall conclusion, the FCA did not deem the FC’s lack of analysis to have amounted to a palpable and overriding error.
-
The Federal Court of Appeal Takes No Prisoners
On October 15, 2020, both parties were granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. We will continue to follow the developments of the appeal.
-
Lencnzer Slaght Welcomes Jacqueline Chan
Canada’s leading litigation firm is pleased to announce that Jacqueline Chan is the newest Associate to join our growing Intellectual Property Group.