An Act to amend the Patent Act

How it changed on the way

68% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,431 words introduced, 883 passed).

substantial changeintent mostly kept

The core purpose of implementing two WTO dispute rulings stayed the same, but Parliament replaced the detailed transitional rules for pre-1989 patents with a shorter set and added an explicit coming-into-force clause. Several subsections on regulatory powers and application dates were rewritten or dropped.

• Added a standard coming-into-force clause allowing the Governor in Council to set the date or dates.

  After: “The provisions of this Act come into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”

• Replaced the introduced version of section 78.1 with a shorter transitional rule.

  Before: “78.1 (1) Applications for patents in Canada filed before October 1, 1989 shall be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of this Act as they read immediately before that date and section 38.1 as it read immediately after this section came into force.”

  After: “78.1 Applications for patents in Canada filed before October 1, 1989 shall be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with section 38.1 and with the provisions of this Act as they read immediately before October 1, 1989.”

How precisely it is written

mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate

The bill uses fixed dates, exact patent terms, and clear transition rules for applications filed before or after October 1, 1989 and 1996. One broad regulation-making power and the coming-into-force clause leave room for executive choice.

Open to argument

• “The Governor in Council may make such regulations as the Governor in Council considers necessary for preventing the in”

  Subjective test of what the Governor in Council considers necessary creates broad discretion rather than an objective standard.

Clear-cut

• “the term limited for the duration of the patent is seventeen years from the date on which the patent is issued”

  Uses a fixed number of years and an objective starting date.

• “seventeen years from the date on which the patent is issued or twenty years from the filing date, whichever term expires later”

  Provides an objective comparison of two calculable periods.

• “Applications for patents in Canada filed before October 1, 1989 shall be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with section 38.1 and with the provisions of this Act as they read immediately before October 1, 1989”

  Specifies exact filing date and refers to the Act text on a fixed past date.

Discretion. The Governor in Council decides when the Act comes into force and may make any regulations it considers necessary to prevent infringement under the new exception.

Challenging the law itself. The amendments contain no obvious vagueness or overbreadth that would engage section 7 or 2(b) of the Charter; disputes would centre on technical patent rules rather than constitutional validity.

Disputing a charge under it. Most rules turn on verifiable filing and issue dates, but the repealed regulatory authority and any new regulations made under the broad power could require argument over their scope.

Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.