• Investment World
• eWorld
• Brand Line
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest
• The New Manager

Stocks

• Quotes
• SE Diary
• Scoreboard
• Open-End Mutual Fund

Cross Currency

• Rates
  
  

Shipping

• Ports
  
  

Archives

• Yesterday
• Datewise
• Resources
• In Focus
• In Depth

Group Sites

• The Hindu
• The Hindu ePaper
• Business Line
• Business Line ePaper
• Sportstar
• Frontline
• The Hindu eBooks
• The Hindu Images

Our Bureau

Mumbai, Oct. 8 The Government has suggested a revised approach to the Madras High Court where the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) could look into the rejection of Novartis’ patent application on its cancer drug Glivec.

The court has asked the parties involved in the case to revert on the Government’s suggestion and the case comes up for its next hearing on October 22.

The IPAB was to look into the rejection of Swiss drug-maker Novartis’ Glivec application by the Patent Controller. But Novartis had objected to the appointment of Mr Chandrasekaran as technical member on the IPAB, as he was head of the Patent Controller’s office when it had rejected Novartis’ application in January 2006.

The Government’s suggestion on Monday is against the backdrop of this objection raised by Novartis, when it petitioned the Court for a new technical member.

Novartis’ cancer drug Glivec has been in the thick of litigation, since late 2003, when it was the first pharmaceutical company to be granted an Exclusive Marketing Right in the country. Novartis then tried to legally prevent companies like Natco, Cipla, Ranbaxy and Sun Pharma from selling generic or similar versions of the same drug.

After India started respecting product-patents from January 2005, all eyes were on the patent application that Novartis had made on Glivec.

And in early 2006, Novartis’ patent application on Glivec was rejected following independent pre-grant oppositions filed by the Cancer Patients Aid Association and some domestic drug-makers. Subsequently, Novartis filed multiple writs at the Court, contesting the rejection of its patent application and certain constitutional parameters that contributed to the rejection.

The case on the rejected patent application then shifted to the IPAB created earlier this April, following a notification from the Centre. But the focus again shifted to the Madras HC, with Novartis objecting to the composition of the IPAB.

Even as this case made progress, the Court dismissed another case regarding Novartis’ Glivec in August this year, where the company has contested certain constitutional parameters that had contributed to the rejection of the patent application on Glivec.

More Stories on : IPR | Courts/Legal Issues | Pharmaceuticals

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Sony bets on LCD TVs to drive festive sales

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line