Pharmaceuticals

In its 7 July 2016 Genentech judgment (Case C-567/14), the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) ruled that Genentech had to pay royalties to Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland under its licence agreement. The Paris Court of Appeal requested a preliminary ruling on whether the provisions of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) preclude the imposition of an obligation to pay a royalty for the use of a patented technology for the entire duration of a licence agreement, in the event that the patents protecting the technology are revoked.  The ECJ concluded that Article 101(1) TFEU does not preclude the imposition of a requirement to pay royalties, provided that the licensee is free to terminate the agreement by giving reasonable notice.
Continue Reading Court of Justice Rules That Genentech Must Pay Royalties to Sanofi

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

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has recently published for public consultation its draft guideline on clinical development of fixed combination medicinal products (Draft Guideline), which is intended to replace CHMP/EWP/240/95 Rev. 1 (Existing Guideline).  The Draft Guideline applies to fixed combination medicinal products containing two or more active substances within a single pharmaceutical form.  The active substances may be known active substances or substances that have yet to be authorised in the EU.
Continue Reading New Draft EMA-Guideline On Clinical Development Of Fixed Combination Medicines

The European Commission (the Commission) confirmed on 27 March 2015 that a German scheme exempting pharmaceutical companies from mandatory rebates is in line with EU State aid rules. The Commission concluded that the scheme facilitated price freezes on certain medicines, which in turn allows the costs of the public health system to be kept under control.

Council Directive 89/105/EEC allows Member States to introduce price freezes on pharmaceutical products. Article 4(2) of the Directive states that derogations from price freezes can be justified for “particular reasons”. Based on these provisions, Germany introduced a mandatory manufacturer’s rebate of 16% on certain prescription medicines sold to public sickness funds and private health insurers between 1 August 2010 and 31 December 2013. Also, under the Article 4(2) exemption, Germany set up a system of derogations for companies whose financial viability would be threatened by the rebate.
Continue Reading German Exemptions from Mandatory Rebates for Pharma Companies Are in Line with EU State Aid Rules

On 4 February 2015, the German Ministry of Justice published a new draft law specifically aimed to combat corruption in the healthcare sector. Key element of the draft legislation will be a newly defined criminal offence that will be inserted as a new Section 299a of the German Criminal Code (StGB). This new criminal offence sanctions active and passive bribery of a wide range of healthcare professionals – not only of medical doctors.

The envisioned new § 299a StGB would significantly sharpen the German anti-corruption laws as far as interactions between life sciences companies with medical doctors and other healthcare professionals are concerned. The criminal culpability would apply to both the healthcare professional that accepts a bribe and the company representative that pays a bribe.
Continue Reading Germany Headed to Stricter Criminal Laws Against “Corruption In The Healthcare Sector”