Finland: Actavis v. Novartis (Valsartan), Supreme Court of Finland, S2014/50, 30 June 2015

The Finnish Supreme Court held that the reversal of the burden of proof stipulated in Article 34 TRIPs as implemented in the Finnish Patent Act does not per se require a party to disclose its manufacturing process, but only to prove that it used a different process than that specified in the patent. The threshold of evidence is a matter of national law.

A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.