"86 Goodmans lawyers across 39 practice areas ranked as among the best lawyers in Canada." - Best Lawyers in Canada
Goodmans Directory

Harry Radomski

Counsel

hradomski@goodmans.ca vCard
Bay Adelaide Centre - West Tower
333 Bay Street, Suite 3400
Toronto, ON M5H 2S7

Tel:   416.597.4142
Fax:   416.979.1234

Harry Radomski serves as counsel at Goodmans. Harry heads the Intellectual Property Group, which has been described as “the best in this field in Canada” (Chambers Canada).

Harry’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, including patent, trademark and copyright disputes and the complex assessments of damages flowing from the infringement of such rights. Harry is a seasoned trial lawyer, who regularly appears before all levels of court in Ontario and in the Federal Court. He has appeared before the Supreme Court of Canada on a number of occasions to address the country’s leading patent, trade-mark and damages issues. He has also appeared in the provinical Superior Courts in British Columbia, New Brunswick and Quebec.

Beyond his intellectual property practice, Harry has extensive experience in litigation involving provincial and federal governments, including judicial reviews of regulatory decisions in the pharmaceutical context, as well as a variety of commericial litigation matters. Outside of his litigation practice, Harry is also involved in contract negotiations and collective bargaining agreements for several hockey coaches, management personnel and hockey officials in the National Hockey League.

RECOGNITION

Harry has been described by his peers in the intellectual property bar as:

  • “the best patent litigator in Canada” (Who’s Who Legal)
  • “a first-tier litigator – there’s nobody better” (Who’s Who Legal)
  • “the current pinnacle of our Bar” (Chambers Canada)
  • “the busiest, hardest-working litigation IP lawyer in Canada – he stands out above everyone else” (Chambers Canada)
  • “fantastically successful” (IAM Patent 1000)
  • “a leading figure and has been for decades” (IAM Patent 1000)
  • “an extremely talented orator [whose] track record in high-stakes cases is incredible” (IAM Patent 1000)

REPRESENTATIVE WORK

Harry’s representative work includes:

  • Ciba-Geigy Canada Ltd. v. Apotex Inc. (1992) - Represented the Respondent at the Supreme Court of Canada on a pivotal trade-mark decision which addressed the issues of passing-off and secondary meaning
  • Merck & Co., Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (1994) - Represented the Respondent at the Supreme Court of Canada in a proceeding which determined the parameters of the vested right by a drug company to a notice of compliance (i.e., marketing approval)
  • Apotex Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al. (1998) - Represented the Appellant at the Supreme Court of Canada in a proceeding which set guidelines for pharmaceutical industry participants on the proper date for assessing a Notice of Allegation served under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations and issues related to patent licensing and sublicensing agreements
  • Apotex Inc. v. Wellcome Foundation Ltd. (2002) - Represented the Appellant at the Supreme Court of Canada in a landmark case which considered the doctrine of sound prediction in the context of the utility requirement imposed under the Patent Act
  • Apotex Inc. v. AstraZeneca Canada Inc. et al. (2006) - Represented the Appellant at the Supreme Court of Canada in a matter under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, which assisted in defining the scope of the protection afforded to a first person (typically, an innovate pharmaceutical manufacturer), engaged the applicable regulatory scheme in respect of its drug product, and set out the parameters under which a second person (typically, a generic pharmaceutical manufacturer) was required to comply with that regulatory scheme
  • Sanofi-Aventis, et al v Apotex Inc., et al. (2015) - Represented the Respondent at the Supreme Court of Canada in a proceeding which considered the methodology to be applied in determining damages and the hypothetical market during the period contemplated under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations
  • AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (2017) - Represented the Respondent at the Supreme Court of Canada in a landmark case which addressed the judicial “promise doctrine” in the context of the utility requirement under the Patent Act

PROFESSIONAL INVOLVEMENT

Harry has lectured on intellectual property issues at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law. He is also an adjunct professor for the LL.M. Health Law IP course at Osgoode Hall Law School.

Harry co-authored the Insurance Act of Ontario - Annotated.

Harry also devotes time to many charitable endeavours which have included Simon Wiesenthal and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Education University of California at Berkeley (LL.M., 1976)
University of Toronto (LL.B., 1975)
University of Toronto (B.Comm., 1972)
Professional Affiliations

Law Society of Ontario
Canadian Bar Association
The Advocates’ Society
Canadian Association of Law Teachers

Year of Call

1978 Ontario