In this case, the plaintiff is a biotechnology company which developed and patented a gene granting an herbicide resistance to the canola plant. As the seed and the plant are patented, every farmer using this plant must have a licence from the biotechnology company, and they are forbidden to reuse their seeds from year to year. The plaintiff discovers that a farmer is using its genetically modified canola without paying a licence. The farmer claims that the presence of genetically modified canola in his field results from an accidental contamination.

Since no agreement could be found between the plaintiff and the farmer, the plaintiff sued the farmer for patent infringement in front of the Canadian Federal Court. The defendant argued that the contamination of his field was accidental and that he had the right to use the seeds that he collected on his lands as they are his property in application of the farmers’ rights. The Federal Court did not agree with the defendant and condemned him for patent infringement on the basis that he knew or should have known that the seeds he used were genetically modified canola developed by the plaintiff. The defendants sought appeal in front of the Federal Court of Appeal, but this latest upheld the decision of first instance.

The defendant brought his case in front of the Supreme Court. The judges of the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the previous courts and considered that even if the contamination was accidental, the fact that agriculture requires a human intervention and that the defendant had identified the GMO meant that the farmer was using the gene and therefore infringing the patent. However, the Supreme Court considered that the presence of the gene did not bring any advantage to the defendant and consequently, that he did not have to pay any damages to the biotechnology company.