The Supreme Administrative Court –overruled the Patent Office (PO) denying AstraZeneca’s application for a supplementary protection certificate (SPC), because the PO should have applied § 77(2) –…
On 11 November 2011 the IP Chamber of the Court of Rome granted the motion for preliminary injunction requested by Novartis AG and Novartis Farma S.p.A. against Mylan S.p.A. on the basis of Novartis’…
A supplementary protection certificate SPC granted for an enantiomer (escitalopram) cannot be declared void because a prior SPC was granted for the racemate (citalopram) when both the racemate and…
The Federal Institute of Intellectual Property can also issue a supplementary protection certificate to an applicant if a certificate for the same active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) or…
In October 2009, we reported the UK Court of Appeal’s referral to the European Court of Justice (as it was then known) regarding the meaning of the term ‘the first authorisation to place the product…
In this blog, we reported earlier about a new nullity action initiated in 2010 against the German supplementary protection certificate (SPC) for enantiomeric escitalopram and the judgment of the…
If a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) should have been denied (or granted with limited scope), because the six month application period following the date of first marketing approval has…
Hungarian Supreme Court's decision on conditions for granting supplementary protection certificates (SPC) under the transitional provisions of the Accession Treaty. The Supreme Court held that the…
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court held in a recent decision that the Swiss company Teva Pharma AG had to bear the court costs and reimburse Novartis's attorneys' fees in preliminary injunction…
