Skip to main content

CIPLA seeks for Compulsory License

Recently CIPLA filed an application before Indian Patent Office seeking for the grant of Compulsory License against Merck’s Anti- HIV Drug, Isentress. CIPLA filed this application of Compulsory License on the ground that “Isentress is not available in the market at reasonable and affordable price”.

It is known that the Act under Sec 84 provided certain grounds for granting Compulsory License, which principally includes the ground “Not available to public at Reasonable Price”.

The term “Reasonably affordable price” must be construed according to the present circumstances prevailing in India”. The price fixed by the Merck & Co. is $7 (USD), which is not “reasonable” to the public in India.

Hence the term “Reasonably affordable price” must be given utmost importance while disposing this application. Till now the patent offices in India have never laid down any boundaries to the pricing of drugs, hope they will at least do it now.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

IPAB has allowed an appeal and granted patent to Pfizer for Tofacitinib and its salts

                                                    In a decision dated 21st August 2020 IPAB vide its  Order  has allowed an appeal and granted Patent  to Appellant M/s. PFIZER PRODUCTS INC., USA  for Tofacitinib and its salts. The appeal is against the   order dated 3 rd  September 2015 passed by the Controller of Patents under Section 15 of the Indian Patents Act, whereby the Appellant’s Indian patent application no. 00991/MUMNP/2003 was rejected on the ground that it is hit by section 13(1)(b) and being non-patentable under section 3(d). The Appellant requested for an urgent hearing of the matter and IPAB considered the request for urgent hearing and passed the present order.  This Patent application claimed the compound 3-{(3R,4R)-4-Methyl-3-[methyl-(7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidin-4-yl)-amino]-piper...

Punitive Damages for Infringement of Trade Dress by Delhi High Court in an Interim Application

Delhi High Court vide its Judgement dated 31st July 2018 in  Louboutin-3 case has granted permanent injunction and punitive damages against a Delhi based retailer for infringing the famed ‘Red Sole’ trademark of Christian Loubutin.  The Plaintiff‟s "RED SOLE" trademark, i.e. , wherein a specific tone of colour red (Pantone no. 18.1663TP) is applied to the outsole of a shoe, is unique in its own accord and became known in the world of fashion only after being introduced by the Plaintiff herein as their Trade Dress. The consumers in India identify the Plaintiff as the sole proprietor of the Christian Louboutin trademarks including the "RED SOLE" trademark and any use of the said trademarks by an unrelated entity will entail taking undue advantage of the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiff, which has been built painstakingly over the several decades; The Defendants are located in Kamla Nagar Market, New Delhi, who were found to be dealing in infringing...