Federal Court of Canada, Toronto, Ontario (Thursday, November 14th, 2024)
Recap of the Justice Roger T. Hughes Memorial Lecture
By: Mollie McLaughlin, JD Candidate 2025, Osgoode Hall Law School
On the evening of November 14th, 2024, the and the CFREF program Connected Minds: Neural and Machine Systems for a Healthy, Just Society hosted the Inaugural Roger T. Hughes Memorial Lecture in Intellectual Property Law at the Federal Court of Canada in Toronto, Ontario. The event was held to honour the contributions and legacy of the .
The evening began with opening remarks from professor , founder and director of the IP Innovation Clinic and scientific director of Connected Minds, and , dean of Osgoode Hall Law School. After giving thanks to the sponsors of the event – , , SOCAN, and – and a thank you to from Dean Farrow to Prof. D’Agostino for organizing the event, the began the evening with the first of many endearing stories remembering the life and legacy of Justice Hughes.
Justice Manson described how everyone was always welcome to Justice Hughes and how he helped to guide the IP landscape in Canada. He noted how Justice Hughes brought a unique perspective to the field and remarked that he will be remembered by the Federal Court Justices for his sense of humour-- and his ability to release decisions quickly.
Following Justice Manson, the took the podium to share his perspectives on a memorable case from Justice Hughes’ past – . Justice Rothstein told the story of how Justice Hughes had represented CCH in this case and managed to persuade his panel that there was copyright infringement by way of making photocopies. Justice Rothstein explained that Justice Hughes had been so convincing that he actually began writing concurring reasons, which would include arguments for secondary infringement! Although the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) ultimately found against Justice Hughes, Justice Rothstein used this case to illustrate how he believes that the hardest cases go to best lawyers, and there was no one better than Justice Hughes for this case.
Justice Rothstein used another case to illustrate this point - . In this case, Justice Hughes represented the plaintiff in their patent infringement lawsuit regarding genetically modified canola plants. In this case, Justice Hughes had to convince the bench that genetically modified plants were patentable, despite the Federal Court of Appeal having recently reversed Justice Rothstein’s own Harvard mouse decision to find that a higher life form was not patentable. Despite this uphill battle, Justice Hughes was ultimately successful, getting the SCC to implicitly reverse the Harvard mouse decision, which brought Justice Rothstein great satisfaction.
The event culminated with the inaugural lecture from professor , CM, FRSC. A long-time friend and colleague of Justice Hughes, the two co-taught a Litigating IP course at Osgoode Hall Law School, Prof. Vaver described Justice Hughes as “a giant in the world of IP” who was always ready to speak with students about what it meant to be a lawyer. Justice Hughes did so despite his busy practice because he believed that senior lawyers owed it to the next generation of the community to pass on their wisdom, commented Prof. Vaver. Prof. Vaver went on to contextualize Justice Hughes’ appointment to the Federal Court of Canada as being “essential” due to the pressing need for a judge with an expertise in IP who was ready, willing, and able to handle anything brought to their desk. Justice Hughes understood how to sift through the technical language provided by “shifty-eyed experts” in patent applications, which is why his arrival to the bench was met with much relief, according to Vaver. Justice Hughes went on to encounter “every imaginable question in IP”, in addition to all the usual non-IP matters, in the cases decided by the Federal Court judge. Though, as Prof. Vaver went on to explain, there is much more to being a great judge than just the cases they decide.
For Prof. Vaver, a great judge is fair, able to listen (at least more than they talk) and be civil, they get decisions out quickly, write clearly, and are more often right than they are wrong. Justice Hughes possessed all of these qualities as demonstrated by Prof. Vaver. For Justice Hughes, being fair was the same as trying to be just. To him, fairness meant deciding practically and as ethically as possible, though he also understood that fairness could not always be achieved through litigation.
Prof. Vaver went on to provide four examples of Justice Hughes exemplifying fairness in the cases he decided, and noted that the last one – a Revenue Canada case resulting in only a $250 award – was Justice Hughes’ favourite. Rather than an expensive or prestigious patent case, Justice Hughes’ favourite case involved a very human way of dealing with injustice, and this is where his legacy lies according to Prof. Vaver.
The legacy of Justice Roger T. Hughes lies “not just in the cases he decided, articles he wrote, or the students he inspired,” but rather with disputes such as the Revenue Canada case. These types of so-called minor cases, often with self-represented litigants, focus on the human aspects of the law, and Justice Hughes would treat these cases with the same amount of care as larger ones with more judicial value. In the eyes of Justice Hughes, “law is a human trying to do the right thing and be fair” according to Vaver.
The Inaugural Roger T. Hughes Memorial Lecture in Intellectual Property Law concluded with closing remarks by Prof. D’Agostino and the announcement of a new bursary to be created in Justice Hughes’ honour for Osgoode students with financial need. This bursary comes from the generosity of the family and friends of Justice Hughes and Osgoode Hall Law School.
Mollie McLaughlin is a 3L IP Intensive student at Osgoode and research assistant to professor D’Agostino
This event was made possible through the generous support of its sponsors:
