It could well be labelled as the final round of a virtual “David versus Goliath” battle between local firms Lasco Distributors Ltd and Medimpex, and pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Ltd over the trading of a generic form of hypertension control drug, Amlodipine (Norvase).

Monday, July 18 will mark the start of this final round of the legal battle in the Supreme Court, and it is expected to last until Friday, July 22.

The assessment of damages was originally set for January 18 to 22, but the court delayed the hearing to July to give the parties sufficient time to comply with the court’s orders.

Pfizer, which is being represented by local firm Denise Kitson, attorney-at-law at Grant, Stewart, Phillips and Company, has also acquired leading Canadian boutique specialising in damages quantification, business valuation and forensic accounting, Cohen Hamilton Steger and Company/Prem Lobo, whose founding principals — Farley Cohen, Ross Hamilton and Peter Steger — are all former practice leaders of major international consultancies.

In addition, Pizer has also acquired the services of a specialist in hypertension, D. Rainford Wilks, who has provided demographics of the incidence of hypertension in Jamaica.

Lasco is being represented by Chen Green and Company, led by Vincent Chen of Haining Road, Kingston, and Medimpex by Ian Robbins, attorney-at-law of White Church Street, Spanish Town.

The parties went to the Supreme Court in 2002 when Pfizer complained that Lasco and Medimpex were infringing on its patent. Pfizer got an injunction blocking them from selling a generic drug Amlodipine (Norvase) which is used to treat high blood pressure.

The injunction lasted from 2005 until May 31,2012, despite the fact that the local Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that Pfizer’s patent had expired in Egypt from March 31, 1997, therefore it could not legally register the patent in Jamaica, as it tried to do.

Pfizer appealed the decision to the United Kingdom Privy Council, which upheld the Supreme Court’s ruling last year.

The matter was then left to the Supreme Court to decide damages owed to the local firms for loss of sale during the period of the injunction. A pretrial review was held on December 2 last year, in relation to the assessment of damages and certain orders were made by Justice Audre Lindo. Pfizer was given permission to call an expert witness and file a report on that.

There are huge differences between the claims being made by the local firms and the amount suggested by Pfizer as compensation for the losses.

Lasco has been seeking US$300 million in damages from restrictions on its sales from the injunction, while Medimpex is seeking US$11.5 million.

However, based on the advice of expert witnesses Cohen, Hamilton, Steger, Pfizer is insisting that Lasco is due no more than US$518,000 and Medimpex US$68,000.

The Pfizer offers have been a huge blow to both local firms, especially Lasco, who had promised substantial benefits for shareholders.

In late April, Lasco’s chairman, Lascelles Chin, informed shareholders attending a Mayberry Investments monthly forum that shareholders that he intended to plough the bulk of that money back into the investments, with the remainder to be issued as dividends.

“It’s going to be a large amount, but not a large percentage. I do not even want to call a figure,” he said in response to questions from the floor.

“I am tempted to tell you, but one thing is that a lot will be done and it will also be invested, and we are going to earn a lot of money,” said the chairman.

But Pfizer has been insisting that that there is no independent empirical source for the annual growth rates used by the local companies to estimate, ”but for” tablet sales volumes, and claiming that the assumed annual growth rates used by Lasco are “overstated”.

The huge differences in claims and counter-claims and high expectancy of the local companies are the ingredients of a major and interesting battle of the figures which, hopefully, will be decided by July 22.