Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Parallellimport av läkemedel - Ompaketeringsundantaget och skyddet mot förfalskade läkemedel

Henningsson, Johanna LU (2023) JURM02 20231
Faculty of Law
Department of Law
Abstract
Within the EU, a regional exhaustion principle applies. This means that goods placed on the market by the trademark owner, or by someone with the consent of the trademark owner, can be freely distributed by anyone within the Union. This allows for parallel importation. Parallel importation refers to a phenomenon where an undertaking buys goods in one Member State, without the consent of the trademark owner, in order to export them to another Member State for sale there. In principle, the trademark owner has the right to prevent the sale of goods whose condition has changed or impaired. In relation to medicinal products, this principle is not always self-evident. The pharmaceutical industry is specific in such a way that quality and patient... (More)
Within the EU, a regional exhaustion principle applies. This means that goods placed on the market by the trademark owner, or by someone with the consent of the trademark owner, can be freely distributed by anyone within the Union. This allows for parallel importation. Parallel importation refers to a phenomenon where an undertaking buys goods in one Member State, without the consent of the trademark owner, in order to export them to another Member State for sale there. In principle, the trademark owner has the right to prevent the sale of goods whose condition has changed or impaired. In relation to medicinal products, this principle is not always self-evident. The pharmaceutical industry is specific in such a way that quality and patient safety is crucial. Therefore, the market participants must consider specific rules. These rules may, for example, require the parallel importer to open a package in order to replace the leaflet with one in the domestic language of the importing Member State. Other national rules may require the parallel importer to change the packaging to a different size.

The assessment of repackaging in the light of the principle of exhaustion has been subject to extensive development in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In order to assess the legality of the repackaging procedure, certain conditions have been developed. Given that the criteria took shape in the CJEU’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb, they are referred to as the BMS criteria. In short, the criteria states that repackaging may only take place when the trademark owner’s conduct involves an artificial partitioning of the market between the Member States. Repackaging must be necessary for the sale of the parallel imported medicinal product. However, repackaging must not damage the reputation of the brand or the original condition of the medicinal product. In addition, there are certain information requirements.

On February 9, 2019, requirements were introduced for prescription-only medicines. Since then, these must be equipped with specific safety features. These should, amongst other things, make it possible to check whether the medicine package has been previously opened. For parallel importers, who are forced to open the packaging in order to provide it with new package leaflets, the new requirements could cause problems. The regulations were previously interpreted by parallel importers, as well as Danish and possibly Swedish authorities, as a requirement to repackage. In November 2022, the CJEU answered a number of questions related to the safety features regulation. The rulings clarified the relationship between the safety features framework and the BMS criteria, as well as the scope for Member States to prescribe additional safety requirements. Repackaging remains an exception. The CJEU also clarified that the regulatory framework is fully harmonized.

The essay examines how the regulatory framework on safety features has changed the meaning of the BMS criteria. These have not changed in legal terms. Traces of previous security features do not constitute objective necessity to repackage. However, some practical modifications of the criteria are identified. For example, repackaging is necessary when it is objectively impossible to reseal a package with a new security feature. It is concluded that the scope of the exemption is unclear. This may lead to varying application within the Union. As a direct result, the trademark owner’s actual scope to exercise its right may vary from one Member State to another.

The thesis also examines the scope for national variations in the approach to parallel importation and security features within the Union. The fact that the regulations are fully harmonized means that the scope for varying legislation is limited. However, some practical differences are identified. These may be due to varying consumer attitudes in different Member States and are fully justified by the BMS criteria. Furthermore, other variations are identified, arising from unclear definitions. In conclusion, the thesis argues that there is a need for a clarification of the legal framework in order to achieve uniform application within the Union. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Inom EU gäller en regional konsumtionsprincip. Denna innebär att varor som satts på marknaden i någon medlemsstat av varumärkeshavaren, eller någon med dennes samtycke, fritt får distribueras inom unionen, även av andra än den som äger rätten till varumärket. Detta möjliggör parallellimport. Parallellimport innebär att någon utan varumärkeshavarens samtycke köper varor i en medlemsstat i syfte att exportera dem till ett annat medlemsland för försäljning där. Varumärkeshavaren har som utgångspunkt rätt att hindra försäljning av varor vars skick förändrats eller försämrats. I förhållande till läkemedel är denna utgångspunkt inte alltid självklar. Läkemedelsbranschens särskilda karaktär, där kvalitet och patientsäkerhet är avgörande, innebär... (More)
Inom EU gäller en regional konsumtionsprincip. Denna innebär att varor som satts på marknaden i någon medlemsstat av varumärkeshavaren, eller någon med dennes samtycke, fritt får distribueras inom unionen, även av andra än den som äger rätten till varumärket. Detta möjliggör parallellimport. Parallellimport innebär att någon utan varumärkeshavarens samtycke köper varor i en medlemsstat i syfte att exportera dem till ett annat medlemsland för försäljning där. Varumärkeshavaren har som utgångspunkt rätt att hindra försäljning av varor vars skick förändrats eller försämrats. I förhållande till läkemedel är denna utgångspunkt inte alltid självklar. Läkemedelsbranschens särskilda karaktär, där kvalitet och patientsäkerhet är avgörande, innebär att aktörerna på marknaden har att beakta vissa särskilda regler. Dessa regler kan bland annat innebära att parallellimportören är tvungen att bryta en förpackning i syfte att byta ut läkemedlets bipacksedel till en på importmedlemsstatens språk. Andra nationella regler, bland annat beträffande krav på förpackningsstorlek, kan innebära att parallellimportören är tvungen att byta ut förpackningen till en av annan storlek.

Hur ompaketering ska bedömas utifrån konsumtionsprincipen har varit föremål för omfattande utveckling i EU-domstolens praxis. För att bedöma lovligheten i ompaketeringsförfarandet har vissa villkor utvecklats. Mot bakgrund av att kriterierna tog form i EU-domstolens avgörande i Bristol-Myers Squibb benämns dessa i uppsatsen BMS-kriterierna. Dessa innebär i korthet att ompaketering endast får ske då varumärkeshavarens agerande innebär en konstlad avskärmning av marknaderna mellan medlemsstaterna. Ompaketering måste vara nödvändigt för att det parallellimporterade läkemedlet ska kunna säljas. Ompaketeringen får emellertid inte skada varumärkets anseende eller läkemedlets ursprungliga beskaffenhet. Till detta kommer vissa informationskrav.

Den 9 februari 2019 infördes krav på att receptbelagda läkemedel som säljs inom unionen ska förses med särskilda säkerhetsdetaljer. Dessa ska bland annat möjliggöra kontroll av om läkemedelsförpackningen tidigare öppnats. För parallellimportörer, som tvingas öppna förpackningarna i syfte att förse dem med bland annat nya bipacksedlar, riskerar de nya kraven att innebära problem. Regelverket tolkades tidigare av parallellimportörer, såväl som danska och möjligen även svenska myndigheter, som ett krav på ompaketering. I november 2022 besvarade EU-domstolen ett antal frågor relaterade till regelverket om säkerhetsdetaljer. I avgörandena klargjordes regelverket om säkerhetsdetaljers förhållande till BMS-kriterierna såväl som medlemsstaternas utrymme att föreskriva ytterligare säkerhetskrav. Det står klart att ompaketering förblir ett undantag. EU-domstolen klargjorde också att regelverket är fullständigt harmoniserat.

Uppsatsen utreder hur regelverket om säkerhetsdetaljer förändrat innebörden i BMS-kriterierna. Det står klart att dessa inte förändrats i rättsligt hänseende. Spår av tidigare säkerhetsdetaljer innebär inte att ompaketering är nödvändigt. Däremot har vissa praktiska modifikationer av kriterierna blivit nödvändiga. Bland annat kan nödvändighet att ompaketera föreligga då det objektivt sett inte går att återförsegla en förpackning med en ny säkerhetsdetalj. Det konstateras att undantagets tillämpningsområde är oklart. Detta riskerar att leda till varierande tillämpning om unionen. Som ett direkt resultat av detta kan varumärkeshavarens faktiska utrymme att utöva sin rätt variera från en medlemsstat till annan.

Uppsatsen undersöker även i övrigt utrymmet för nationella variationer i förhållningssättet gentemot parallellimport och säkerhetsdetaljer inom unionen. Att regelverken är fullständigt harmoniserade innebär att utrymmet för varierande lagstiftning är mycket begränsat. Vissa praktiska skillnader kan dock identifieras. Dessa beror på varierande inställning bland konsumenter i de olika medlemsstaterna och är utifrån BMS-kriterierna fullt motiverade. Andra variationer identifieras. Dessa riskerar att uppstå till följd av otydliga definitioner. I syfte att uppnå enhetlig tillämpning inom unionen identifieras således ett behov av tydligare regelverk. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Henningsson, Johanna LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Parallel importation of pharmaceuticals - The repackaging exemption and the protection against falsified medicines
course
JURM02 20231
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU-rätt, immaterialrätt, varumärkesrätt, parallellimport, parallellimport av läkemedel, säkerhetsdetaljer, läkemedel
language
Swedish
id
9115218
date added to LUP
2023-06-08 12:12:08
date last changed
2023-06-08 12:12:08
@misc{9115218,
  abstract     = {{Within the EU, a regional exhaustion principle applies. This means that goods placed on the market by the trademark owner, or by someone with the consent of the trademark owner, can be freely distributed by anyone within the Union. This allows for parallel importation. Parallel importation refers to a phenomenon where an undertaking buys goods in one Member State, without the consent of the trademark owner, in order to export them to another Member State for sale there. In principle, the trademark owner has the right to prevent the sale of goods whose condition has changed or impaired. In relation to medicinal products, this principle is not always self-evident. The pharmaceutical industry is specific in such a way that quality and patient safety is crucial. Therefore, the market participants must consider specific rules. These rules may, for example, require the parallel importer to open a package in order to replace the leaflet with one in the domestic language of the importing Member State. Other national rules may require the parallel importer to change the packaging to a different size.

The assessment of repackaging in the light of the principle of exhaustion has been subject to extensive development in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In order to assess the legality of the repackaging procedure, certain conditions have been developed. Given that the criteria took shape in the CJEU’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb, they are referred to as the BMS criteria. In short, the criteria states that repackaging may only take place when the trademark owner’s conduct involves an artificial partitioning of the market between the Member States. Repackaging must be necessary for the sale of the parallel imported medicinal product. However, repackaging must not damage the reputation of the brand or the original condition of the medicinal product. In addition, there are certain information requirements. 

On February 9, 2019, requirements were introduced for prescription-only medicines. Since then, these must be equipped with specific safety features. These should, amongst other things, make it possible to check whether the medicine package has been previously opened. For parallel importers, who are forced to open the packaging in order to provide it with new package leaflets, the new requirements could cause problems. The regulations were previously interpreted by parallel importers, as well as Danish and possibly Swedish authorities, as a requirement to repackage. In November 2022, the CJEU answered a number of questions related to the safety features regulation. The rulings clarified the relationship between the safety features framework and the BMS criteria, as well as the scope for Member States to prescribe additional safety requirements. Repackaging remains an exception. The CJEU also clarified that the regulatory framework is fully harmonized.

The essay examines how the regulatory framework on safety features has changed the meaning of the BMS criteria. These have not changed in legal terms. Traces of previous security features do not constitute objective necessity to repackage. However, some practical modifications of the criteria are identified. For example, repackaging is necessary when it is objectively impossible to reseal a package with a new security feature. It is concluded that the scope of the exemption is unclear. This may lead to varying application within the Union. As a direct result, the trademark owner’s actual scope to exercise its right may vary from one Member State to another. 

The thesis also examines the scope for national variations in the approach to parallel importation and security features within the Union. The fact that the regulations are fully harmonized means that the scope for varying legislation is limited. However, some practical differences are identified. These may be due to varying consumer attitudes in different Member States and are fully justified by the BMS criteria. Furthermore, other variations are identified, arising from unclear definitions. In conclusion, the thesis argues that there is a need for a clarification of the legal framework in order to achieve uniform application within the Union.}},
  author       = {{Henningsson, Johanna}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Parallellimport av läkemedel - Ompaketeringsundantaget och skyddet mot förfalskade läkemedel}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}