Actavis Group and Actavis (Judgment of the Court) [2013] EUECJ C-443/12 (12 December 2013)
Article 3(c) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 precludes a patent holder from obtaining more than one SPC for the same active ingredient based on the same patent, even if the subsequent medicinal product contains that active ingredient in combination with another not protected as such by the patent.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] EUECJ C-443/12
- Parties
- Claimant: Actavis Group PTC EHF; Claimant: Actavis UK Ltd; Respondent: Sanofi; Respondent: Sanofi Pharma Bristol-Myers Squibb SNC
- Jurisdiction
- European Union
- Judgment Date
- 12 December 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Preliminary Ruling / Reference From National Court
- Outcome
- Second SPC for irbesartan-hydrochlorothiazide combination may not be granted; Article 3(c) precludes it.
- Legal Topics
- Supplementary Protection Certificate, Patent Law, Medicinal Products, Regulation (ec) No 469/2009
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Actavis Group PTC EHF
Claimant
Actavis UK Ltd
Claimant
Sanofi
Respondent
Sanofi Pharma Bristol-Myers Squibb SNC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling / Reference From National Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Article 3(c) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 precludes the grant of more than one supplementary protection certificate (SPC) for the same active ingredient based on the same patent
- 2 Criteria for determining if a product is protected by a basic patent under Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Ratio Decidendi
Article 3(c) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 precludes a patent holder from obtaining more than one SPC for the same active ingredient based on the same patent, even if the subsequent medicinal product contains that active ingredient in combination with another not protected as such by the patent.
Court Disposition
Second SPC for irbesartan-hydrochlorothiazide combination may not be granted; Article 3(c) precludes it.
Orders
- No need to answer Question 1.
- Costs are a matter for the national court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment