"[Mr. Steger's] evidence … was given professionally, thoroughly, and fairly."- Judgment in 2017 FC 332
This action involved Teva’s delayed entry in launching a generic version of the pharmaceutical molecule pregabalin in Canada pursuant to Pfizer’s statutory stay rights provided in the PMNOC Regulations. As a result of the delay, it was necessary to construct a but-for world of what Teva’s sales and profits would have been had it not been delayed entry.
CHS was retained by Counsel for Pfizer as financial expert to quantify the Teva’s lost profits in the but-for world. As with many Section 8 cases, at particular issue between the parties and their experts (and resultant impact on Teva’s loss claim) was the product trade spend (or rebates) percentages that would have been paid by Teva to pharmacies to carry the product. Teva argued that its “sole source” trade spend rate would have only been 15%-20%. However, CHS prepared a comprehensive analysis of available documentation regarding trade spend rates for Teva’s various other molecules, and concluded that the “sole source” rate was much higher at 34%-38%. The Court concluded at a 35% rate.