On behalf of a unanimous bench, Supreme Court Justice Louis LeBel wrote: «[T] he public's right to proper disclosure was denied in this case, since the
claims ended with two
individually claimed compounds, thereby obscuring the true
invention.
Nevertheless, the Supreme Court held that where there were two
individually claimed compounds, and it was known that one worked and the other did not, the true
invention was obscured as the disclosure failed to state in clear terms what the
invention was.