Experience and Focus You Need: Research Integrity and Research Misconduct – Canada’s Firm

Factors in Research Integrity Misconduct

Scipione Legal Solutions is the pioneer in the field of defending researchers who have been accused of research misconduct, breach of institutional responsible conduct of research (RCR) policies, and authorship matters. Our market research has concluded that researchers in Canada repeatedly express a growing concern that they would be left to their own vices during a research misconduct proceeding.

Let Scipione Legal Solutions be there for you during the inquiry and investigation – and judicial review if necessary. Given that a finding of misconduct is effectively the death penalty for a research career – this is a super serious issue. As a Respondent during a research integrity case, you need specialized legal and technical expertise. Mr. Scipione has worked on some of the biggest integrity cases in Canada at all levels including the assessment, inquiry, and investigation, as well as, through several judicial reviews. Let Scipione Legal Solutions be your rock during this stressful time and support you to obtain a result that will truly let you move forward with the least amount of drama so you can continue to do what you’re passionate about. With experience in handling dozens of integrity matters – including having a strong understanding of how institutions function – let Scipione Legal Solutions be your ally and provide the defense you deserve.

As a researcher, the initiation of a potential integrity case against you can prematurely end your research career. Let Scipione Legal Solutions be your rock during this difficult process and make this only an inconvenience going forward.  

There is a fine line between what is called “detrimental research practices” and “research misconduct” or a “breach of research integrity policy.”

Scipione Legal Solutions specializes in representing researchers who are going through research misconduct proceedings with their institution, as well as, the Secretariat for Responsible Conduct of Research. Oftentimes researchers are left grossly unrepresented and all too often fall prey to the Responsible Conduct of Research policies being implemented without any consistency or diligence by their institution. A finding of misconduct or breach of the integrity policy is a serious concern and can kill a research career. As such, if you are served with a letter of concern, it is imperative that you reach out to Scipione Legal Solutions to at least discuss the matter and give you a real-world indication as to what will occur, and how to best approach each step in the process. Having served as the key point person on several of the biggest research integrity cases in Canada, Mr. Scipione is likely the lawyer most well positioned to provide you with support during this process and a pragmatic strategy to fight these concerns and protect your research career.

Mr. Scipione has been heavily involved in the following matters:

  • Asa v. University Health Network  2016 ONSC 439 (Div. Ct.);
  • Asa v. University Health Network  2017 ONSC 4287 (Div. Ct.); and,
  • Asa v. University Health Network  2018 CanLII 73674 (ON HPARB).
Prior to working in the research integrity space, GF worked in litigation involving technical experts for nearly a half-decade as a pharmaceutical litigation lawyer. where his focus involved working with technical experts from a variety of scientific and engineering fields.
Litigation Experience involving Scientific Matters…

In addition to having owned and oversaw the above-noted matters, Mr. Scipione has also been involved in the following litigation involving scientific-technical matters:

  • Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Hospira Healthcare Corp. et al. (T-366-14 & T-434-13 PMNOC re: pemetrexed);
  • Bayer Healthcare AG v. Sandoz Canada Inc. (T-775-06, PMNOC re: ciprofloxacin);
  • Fournier Pharma et al. v. Minister of Health & Sandoz Canada Inc. (T-1184-10, PMNOC re: fenofibrate);
  • Pharmascience Inc. v. Pfizer Canada Inc. (T-1434-14, s. 8 damages action re: pregabalin);
  • Bayer Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (T-1653-12, PMNOC re: Vigamox (moxifloxacin));
  • Bayer Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC et al. (T-328-13, PMNOC re: Vigamox (moxifloxacin));
  • Alcon Canada Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (T-2178-12, PMNOC re: Vigamox (moxifloxacin));
  • Bayer Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (T-1550-12, PMNOC re: YAZ);
  • Bayer Inc. et al. v. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Co. et al. (T-215-12, PMNOC re: YAZ);
  • Teva Canada Limited v. Nycomed Canada Inc. et al. (T-368-08, s. 8 damages action re: pantoprazole); and,
  • Apotex Inc. v. Takeda Canada Inc. (T-1786-08, s. 8 damages action re: pantoprazole).