Scrip is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

India rejects Bayer Nexavar CL appeal

This article was originally published in Scrip

Executive Summary

India's apex court recently dismissed Bayer's plea in the high profile Nexavar (sorafenib tosylate) compulsory licensing litigation, but the case hearing appears yet again to have touched upon the delicate issue of R&D spends along the way.

You may also be interested in...



As Natco Ups The Ante Lilly Readies Voluntary Licensing For Olumiant

Eli Lilly responds with baricitinib donation plan and efforts to sew up royalty free voluntary licenses with local Indian firms as challenger Natco seeks a compulsory license for its version of the JAK inhibitor, which it is ready to launch.

India To Scrap Intellectual Property Appellate Board

Legal experts explain why India’s plans to abolish the Intellectual Property Appellate Board and shift its powers to courts may be problematic for stakeholders, including those pursuing infringement charges. The transition could mean a significant burden on courts both in terms of capability and capacity, and IPR cases will now conflate into all other pending commercial matters, some experts said, though others cheered the proposed change.

India To Scrap Intellectual Property Appellate Board: Should Pharma Worry?

Legal experts tell the Pink Sheet why India’s plans to abolish the Intellectual Property Appellate Board and shift its powers to courts may be problematic for stakeholders, including those pursuing infringement charges. The transition could mean a significant burden on courts both in terms of capability and capacity, and IPR cases will now conflate into all other pending commercial matters, some experts said, though others cheered the proposed change.

Related Content

Topics

Related Companies

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

SC027247

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Thank you for submitting your question. We will respond to you within 2 business days. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel