A Ray of Light in Muddy Waters? -The CJEU rules on combination SPCs in C-121/17 Teva v Gilead
(2018) In European Pharmaceutical Law Review 2(3). p.169-173- Abstract
- On July 25th 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its decision in C-121/17 Teva v Gilead , and thereby delivered yet another judgement on the interpretation of crucial provisions in the Regulation No 469/2009 concerning supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) for medicinal products (the SPC regulation). This time the CJEU attempted to clarify the meaning of article 3(a) of the SPC regulation.Article 3 (a) requires that the “product” that is the subject of the SPC must be “protected by a basic patent in force”. Notwithstanding its central significance for SPC applicants, patent offices, attorneys and Courts, it has for many years not been clear what is exactly protected by a basic patent for SPC purposes,... (More)
- On July 25th 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its decision in C-121/17 Teva v Gilead , and thereby delivered yet another judgement on the interpretation of crucial provisions in the Regulation No 469/2009 concerning supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) for medicinal products (the SPC regulation). This time the CJEU attempted to clarify the meaning of article 3(a) of the SPC regulation.Article 3 (a) requires that the “product” that is the subject of the SPC must be “protected by a basic patent in force”. Notwithstanding its central significance for SPC applicants, patent offices, attorneys and Courts, it has for many years not been clear what is exactly protected by a basic patent for SPC purposes, especially in applications where protection is sought for a combination of active ingredients of the medicinal product.To bring some clarity into these murky waters, a series of referrals for preliminary rulings have reached the CJEU in recent years under the Article 267 TEU procedure. This paper discusses C-121/17 Teva v Gilead, which presents the most recent decision by the CJEU in these matters.. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/07da7d7b-c7d4-4dfa-ad5a-b4a59271b061
- author
- Minssen, Timo LU and Bostyn, Sven
- publishing date
- 2018
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Medical law, Medicinsk rätt
- in
- European Pharmaceutical Law Review
- volume
- 2
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 5 pages
- publisher
- Lexxion
- ISSN
- 2511-7157
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- 07da7d7b-c7d4-4dfa-ad5a-b4a59271b061
- date added to LUP
- 2020-12-16 14:15:49
- date last changed
- 2020-12-23 10:27:08
@article{07da7d7b-c7d4-4dfa-ad5a-b4a59271b061, abstract = {{On July 25th 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its decision in C-121/17 Teva v Gilead , and thereby delivered yet another judgement on the interpretation of crucial provisions in the Regulation No 469/2009 concerning supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) for medicinal products (the SPC regulation). This time the CJEU attempted to clarify the meaning of article 3(a) of the SPC regulation.Article 3 (a) requires that the “product” that is the subject of the SPC must be “protected by a basic patent in force”. Notwithstanding its central significance for SPC applicants, patent offices, attorneys and Courts, it has for many years not been clear what is exactly protected by a basic patent for SPC purposes, especially in applications where protection is sought for a combination of active ingredients of the medicinal product.To bring some clarity into these murky waters, a series of referrals for preliminary rulings have reached the CJEU in recent years under the Article 267 TEU procedure. This paper discusses C-121/17 Teva v Gilead, which presents the most recent decision by the CJEU in these matters..}}, author = {{Minssen, Timo and Bostyn, Sven}}, issn = {{2511-7157}}, keywords = {{Medical law; Medicinsk rätt}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{169--173}}, publisher = {{Lexxion}}, series = {{European Pharmaceutical Law Review}}, title = {{A Ray of Light in Muddy Waters? -The CJEU rules on combination SPCs in C-121/17 Teva v Gilead}}, volume = {{2}}, year = {{2018}}, }