NHS England has recently published draft proposals on how it plans to approach doing commercial deals with pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. This draft “Commercial Framework” is now open for comment and consultation (stakeholders can submit their views here). The consultation period ends on 10 January 2020, with Commercial Framework expected to be finalized
Supporting clients in the pharmaceutical, healthcare, medical device and consumer products sectors, Raj Gathani's practice is built around EU and UK regulatory and strategic advice.
Increasingly, Raj concentrates on post market-launch projects, such as advising on advertising compliance, communications, interactions with healthcare professionals and patients, pricing controls and reimbursement strategies particularly in the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
Healthcare, its structure and delivery are specialist practice areas for Raj, particularly having operated healthcare and pharmacy businesses for eight years prior to joining the firm. This experience enables Raj to provide in-depth advice to healthcare clients –particularly those in the digital health space – as well as other life sciences companies whose work engages medical practice, dispensing and health-services rules.
Raj Gathani, a Trainee Solicitor in Covington’s London office, contributed to this post.
On 1 September 2015 the General Court issued an interim order in favour of Pari Pharma GmbH (“Pari”) to suspend the European Medicines Agency’s (“EMA”) decision to grant a third-party, Novartis Europharm Ltd (“Novartis”), access to certain documents prepared during the Marketing Authorisation (“MA”) application process (the “MA Documents”). The MA Documents at issue included EMA Assessment Reports on similarity and superiority between Pari’s product (Vantobra) and Novartis’ product (TOBI Podhaler), which has an EU MA as an orphan medicine. Novartis made the request to the EMA for access to the MA Documents under the Transparency Regulation 1049/2001. The main case is currently pending before the General Court (Case T-235/15).
The thrust of Pari’s argument before the General Court was that the MA Documents contain Pari’s regulatory strategy for obtaining MA approval, disclosure of which might cause Pari serious and irreparable financial damage. The President of the General Court acknowledged that the case raised complex issues in the area of confidentiality and stated that the main proceedings (rather than an interim hearing) is the appropriate forum to address such issues.. As such the President considered that the MA Documents fell under a presumption of confidentiality and ordered the EMA not to disclose the MA Documents.
Continue Reading General Court Makes Interim Order to Protect Confidentiality in Pari Pharma Transparency Case