On March 2, 2017, the Federal Court of Canada issued public judgment and reasons for an award totaling $1.5 million comprised of $500,000 in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages for the plaintiff in Airbus Helicopters SAS v Bell Helicopter Texteron Canada Limitée, 2017 FC 170. Pursuant to an October 2, 2009 order, the quantification of damages in the proceeding was bifurcated from the liability issues. Under the liability phase, Bell Helicopter was found to have infringed Canadian Patent No. 2,207,787 (787 Patent) which relates to a helicopter equipped with a skid-type landing gear (see Eurocopter v Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée, 2012 FC 113, aff’d 2013 FCA 219).

With respect to compensatory damages, since the defendant’s helicopters that were found to infringe the 787 Patent (the Legacy gear) were never sold, the Court went on to determine a reasonable royalty. After a lengthy analysis of the case law regarding a reasonable royalty, the Court arrived at the sum of $500,000 by splitting the difference between what it determined was the plaintiff’s “minimum willingness to accept”($475,000) and the defendant’s “maximum willingness to pay” ($525,000).

With respect to punitive damages, in issuing the $1 million award the Court relied on various findings from the liability phase, including the following from the liability decision of the Federal Court (2012 FC 113):

[441] Not only did Bell profit from its misconduct – the development of the Production gear would not have been possible without the development of the Legacy gear – but the evidence shows that Bell concealed the fact to the public and the potential purchasers of the Bell 429 that it had imported from a competitor the sleigh type landing gear and copied the Moustache Landing gear from Eurocopter EC120, while suggesting that the Legacy gear was somewhat a “premiere” at Bell and publicly claiming in the Minderhoud article the unique advantages in terms of improved dynamic behaviour (ground resonance) and the lower weight of the Legacy gear, all advantages already publicly disclosed in the ‘787 Patent.

For full decision please see: https://tinyurl.com/kuvod2n.

Summary By: Thomas Wong

E-TIPS® ISSUE

17 03 22

Disclaimer: This Newsletter is intended to provide readers with general information on legal developments in the areas of e-commerce, information technology and intellectual property. It is not intended to be a complete statement of the law, nor is it intended to provide legal advice. No person should act or rely upon the information contained in this newsletter without seeking legal advice.

E-TIPS is a registered trade-mark of Deeth Williams Wall LLP.