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 185

Generics v Lundbeck - distinguishing the sufficiency requirements for product and process claims
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • May 19 2008

In Generics v Lundbeck, the Court of Appeal provided important guidance on the judgment of the House of Lords in Biogen v Medeva regarding the scope of protection to which an inventor is entitled and the enabling disclosure the specification must provide to support the claims in the patent


Merck triumphs as new and inventive dosing regimen held patentable
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • May 29 2008

Actavis sued to revoke Merck's patent with a second medical use claim (in the so-called 'Swiss form') for the use of finasteride in the preparation for a drug to treat androgenic alopecia with a lower dosage than disclosed in the prior art


Celgene v. Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • June 24 2009

Celgene is the current owner of several patents relating to thalidomide


Dr Reddy v Eli Lilly: the Court of Appeal consigns the old UK legal test for the validity of selection patents to history and looks to Europe for the answer
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • January 28 2010

Selection patents disclose a class of compounds along with a claim that the members of that class have a specific feature or quality


Shire Biochem Inc. v. Canada; Janssen-Ortho Inc. v. Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • December 20 2007

The Court reasoned that because the Patent Act defines the patentee as the person entitled to the benefit of the patent for that invention, and because the Patent Act provides the ability to sue for reasonable compensation from the time the patent application is laid open, once the patent is granted a patentee is entitled to the benefit of the patent from the date the patent application was laid open


Pfizer v Ranbaxy; 55.2 proceeding; October 5, 2007 - atorvastatin
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • October 25 2007

The trial judge granted prohibition in respect of one patent claiming a novel crystalline form of atorvastatin (the "crystalline form patent") and denied prohibition in respect of another patent claiming a novel process for making atorvastatin (the "process patent"


Canada (Attorney General) v. Celgene Corporation, appeal of a PMPRB decision
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • January 20 2010

The Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the Trial Judge and restored the decision of the PMPRB providing jurisdiction to the PMPRB over medicines imported under the Special Access Program


Conflicting pharmaceutical trade marks
  • Gowling WLG
  • European Union
  • November 12 2008

The Court of First Instance (CFI) has upheld the opposition by Aventis Pharma SA (Aventis) against Nycomed GmbH's (Nycomed) application for the Community trade mark PRAZOL


Lessons on chemical classes
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • November 12 2008

In July this year, Wragge & Co's Intellectual Property team reported on the German Appeal Court decision on Eli Lilly's patent for the anti-psychotic drug olanzapine


Court overturns PMPRB's decisions in respect of the medicine copaxone
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • November 18 2009

On November 12, 2009, Justice Hughes of the Federal Court allowed two judicial review applications of Teva Neuroscience G.P.-S.E.N.C. in respect of two decisions made by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board