Bristol-Myers Holdings Ireland UnLtd Company v Norton (Waterford) Ltd (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 173 (29 June 2023)

Bristol-Myers Holdings Ireland UnLtd Company v Norton (Waterford) Ltd (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 173 (29 June 2023)

Damages would not adequately compensate BMS for loss of exclusivity and market position if Teva launched generic Apixaban before trial; SPC enjoys presumptive validity; Teva's procedural complaints and discovery issues do not warrant refusal of injunction; balance of convenience favours maintaining status quo pending trial.

Citation
[2023] IECA 173
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company; Defendant/appellant: Norton (Waterford) Limited t/a Teva Pharmaceuticals Ireland
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Injunction Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed, interlocutory injunction upheld
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Supplemental Protection Certificate (spc), Interlocutory Injunction, Damages Adequacy, Priority Right, Discovery Obligations
Intellectual Property Pharmaceutical Law Patent Infringement Supplemental Protection Certificate (spc) Interlocutory Injunction Damages Adequacy Priority Right Discovery Obligations

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company

Plaintiff/respondent

Norton (Waterford) Limited t/a Teva Pharmaceuticals Ireland

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory injunction restraining Teva from infringing SPC should be upheld pending trial
  2. 2 Adequacy of damages as remedy for BMS and Teva
  3. 3 Impact of procedural conduct and discovery delays on entitlement to injunction

Ratio Decidendi

Damages would not adequately compensate BMS for loss of exclusivity and market position if Teva launched generic Apixaban before trial; SPC enjoys presumptive validity; Teva's procedural complaints and discovery issues do not warrant refusal of injunction; balance of convenience favours maintaining status quo pending trial.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed, interlocutory injunction upheld

Orders

  • Teva restrained from infringing SPC pending trial
  • BMS to provide undertaking as to damages