Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Intellectual Property [2022] ZACCP 1

Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH and Others v Dr Reddy's Laboratories (Pty) Ltd (22237/21; 2007/06238-5)

Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH and Others v Dr Reddy's Laboratories (Pty) Ltd (22237/21; 2007/06238-5) [2022] ZACCP 1; 2022 BIP 291 (CP); [2022] HIPR 188 (CP) (1 March 2022)

Court
Court of the Commissioner of Patents
Case number
22237/21; 2007/06238-5
Judge
R Keightley

The court found that the order granted was interim in both form and effect, as both parties approached the matter on the basis of interim relief and the judgment made only prima facie findings. The alleged final findings on obviousness and claim integers were not definitive and did not preclude Dr Reddy's from raising these issues in subsequent proceedings. The interests of justice did not warrant appealability, as no evidence was presented of significant public health impact from the interim interdict. The application for leave to appeal failed to meet the threshold for reasonable prospects…

Source excerpt

  • Patent Infringement
  • Interim Interdict
  • Appealability Of Interim Orders
  • Costs Award
  • Swiss Form Claims
Read case analysis
Intellectual Property [2021] ZACCP 3

Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH and Others v Dr Reddy's Laboratories (Pty) Ltd (2007/06238-5)

Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH and Others v Dr Reddy's Laboratories (Pty) Ltd (2007/06238-5) [2021] ZACCP 3; 2021 BIP 6 (CP); [2021] HIPR 184 (CP) (15 December 2021)

Court
Court of the Commissioner of Patents
Case number
2007/06238-5
Judge
Keightley

The court found that Bayer established a prima facie right to protection of its patent-in-suit, which is drafted in the Swiss form and is valid under South African law, supported by persuasive authority from English law and previous local cases. Dr Reddy's failed to place serious doubt on the validity of Swiss form claims or demonstrate that the patent-in-suit was not a genuine Swiss form claim. The evidence showed that the patented dosage regimen was novel and not obvious at the priority date. Dr Reddy's product, Rivaxored, infringed the patent by importing and selling a rapid release rivaro…

Source excerpt

  • Patent Infringement
  • Interim Interdict
  • Swiss Form Claims
  • Novelty And Obviousness
  • Misrepresentation In Patent Application
  • Public Interest In Patent Law
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.