Novartis fails in Indian legal challenge
Monday, 13 August 2007
Amy Yee from New Delhi and Clive Cookson from London
THE dismissal by an Indian court last Monday of a challenge to the country's controversial patent laws filed by the Swiss pharmaceuticals maker Novartis, signals a victory for health advocates who say they are protecting cheap generic drugs for the developing world.
But the decision by Chennai High Court struck a blow to the pharmaceutical industry's hopes of bringing drug patent protection in India up to international standards. It "will have long-term negative consequences for research and development into better medicines for patients in India and abroad," said Novartis.
"This is a huge relief for millions of patients and doctors in developing countries who depend on affordable medicines from India," said Tido von Schoen-Angerer of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), the medical humanitarian organisation.
Novartis sought to revise aspects of India's patent laws, which it said violated World Trade Organisation rules. The company said it was unlikely to appeal against the ruling.
Led by MSF, public health advocates insisted that India should be allowed to remain the "pharmacy of the developing world"; 84 per cent of the antiretroviral drugs MSF prescribes to HIV/Aids patients come from Indian generic companies.
The dispute tested the bounds of stronger patent laws enacted by Delhi in 2005 and highlighted India's growing importance as a global generic drugmaker.
It is also another example of clashes between developing world governments and drug companies over patents. Thailand and Brazil this year overrode patents in order to buy generics.
Novartis had disputed a crucial part of Indian law that restricts the patenting of small improvements to drugs, such as a change from tablet to capsule form, which can give a drugmaker another 20 years of patent protection. The company had challenged a decision by India's patent office to reject a patent application for its cancer drug Glivec. Novartis claimed the patent restrictions in the Indian Patents Act were not compliant with WTO rules.
Until recently, India did not grant pharmaceutical product patents. As part of WTO negotiations, India enacted a new regime in 2005 that gave stronger and broader protection of intellectual property rights.
Harvey Bale, director general of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers, urged the Indian government to amend the legislation in the light of last Monday's court ruling.
"India has the potential to be a global leader in biomedical R&D, but its current patent legislation condemns it to lag behind," he said.
..........................................
— FT Syndication Service
THE dismissal by an Indian court last Monday of a challenge to the country's controversial patent laws filed by the Swiss pharmaceuticals maker Novartis, signals a victory for health advocates who say they are protecting cheap generic drugs for the developing world.
But the decision by Chennai High Court struck a blow to the pharmaceutical industry's hopes of bringing drug patent protection in India up to international standards. It "will have long-term negative consequences for research and development into better medicines for patients in India and abroad," said Novartis.
"This is a huge relief for millions of patients and doctors in developing countries who depend on affordable medicines from India," said Tido von Schoen-Angerer of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), the medical humanitarian organisation.
Novartis sought to revise aspects of India's patent laws, which it said violated World Trade Organisation rules. The company said it was unlikely to appeal against the ruling.
Led by MSF, public health advocates insisted that India should be allowed to remain the "pharmacy of the developing world"; 84 per cent of the antiretroviral drugs MSF prescribes to HIV/Aids patients come from Indian generic companies.
The dispute tested the bounds of stronger patent laws enacted by Delhi in 2005 and highlighted India's growing importance as a global generic drugmaker.
It is also another example of clashes between developing world governments and drug companies over patents. Thailand and Brazil this year overrode patents in order to buy generics.
Novartis had disputed a crucial part of Indian law that restricts the patenting of small improvements to drugs, such as a change from tablet to capsule form, which can give a drugmaker another 20 years of patent protection. The company had challenged a decision by India's patent office to reject a patent application for its cancer drug Glivec. Novartis claimed the patent restrictions in the Indian Patents Act were not compliant with WTO rules.
Until recently, India did not grant pharmaceutical product patents. As part of WTO negotiations, India enacted a new regime in 2005 that gave stronger and broader protection of intellectual property rights.
Harvey Bale, director general of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers, urged the Indian government to amend the legislation in the light of last Monday's court ruling.
"India has the potential to be a global leader in biomedical R&D, but its current patent legislation condemns it to lag behind," he said.
..........................................
— FT Syndication Service