We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 28

Medical products: to be or not to be?
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • July 28 2010

The German Federal Court of Justice has given a key decision in its judgment of 14 January 2010 (Case I ZR 13807) relating to the differentiation of foodstuffs and medicinal products in borderline cases


ECJ: no pharmacy chains in Germany
  • Bird & Bird
  • European Union, Germany
  • July 17 2009

On 19 May 2009 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has confirmed that Germany can have national legislation which prevents non-pharmacists from owning and operating pharmacies (joined cases C-17107 and C- 172-07


The Bolar exemption protection of API suppliers
  • Bird & Bird
  • European Union, Germany
  • May 18 2014

The CJEU has recently been asked by the German courts to consider whether the Bolar exemption extends to a third party manufacturer which supplies a


Food: to be or not to be!
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • July 21 2010

The German Federal Court of Justice has passed a cornerstone decision by its judgment dated 14 January 2010, case I ZR 13807, relating to the differentiation of foodstuff and medicines in borderline cases


Federal Supreme Court of Germany decides on second medical use claims that relate to dosage recommendations
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • May 29 2007

In the decision Carvedilol II (file X ZR 23601), the Federal Supreme Court had to deal with the validity of the German part of a European patent that was defended with a main claim, the essential part of which reads as follows: “Use of Carvedilol for the manufacture of a medicament , wherein the medicament is administered in an initial dose of 3.125 mg , daily for a period of 7- 28 days .”


End of German Olanzapine battle: Federal Supreme Court upholds patent
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • March 11 2009

On December 16, 2008 the Federal Supreme Court gave its judgment determining the validity of the Olanzapine patent, this was further to its revocation by the Federal Patent Court at first instance


FSC decides on patentability of neural progenitor cells II (Brustle)
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • February 25 2013

Recently, the German Federal Supreme Court decided on a nullity action on the patentability of progenitor cells extracted from human embryonic stem


The German “dioxin incident”
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • February 9 2011

Since December 2010 there have been several media reports on dioxin in animal feed in Germany


Denial of absolute product protection for DNA-patents (CJ decision in Monsanto v Cefetra, C- 42808) a German perspective
  • Bird & Bird
  • European Union, Germany
  • July 27 2010

The Court of Justice of the European Communities just recently denied absolute product protection of patent claims directed to DNA sequences in the case Monsanto v Cefetra and others, C- 42808


Does requesting and receiving approval for a pharmaceutical create a threat of patent infringement? A German perspective
  • Bird & Bird
  • Germany
  • February 28 2008

Under German law, neither the application for a marketing approval nor obtaining it constitutes a ‘use’ act under Section 9 German Patent Act