Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Takeda Chemical Industries Limited (Patent) [2001] UKIntelP o00202 (6 December 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2001/o00202.html
Cite as: [2001] UKIntelP o00202, [2001] UKIntelP o202
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Takeda Chemical Industries Limited [2001] UKIntelP o00202 (6 December 2001)
For the whole decision click here: o00202
Patent decision
- BL number
- O/002/02
- Concerning rights in
- Concerning rights in Application Nos. SPC/GB/96/030, SPC/GB/96/031, SPC/GB/96/032, SPC/GB/96/033, SPC/GB/96/034, SPC/GB/96/035
- Hearing Officer
- Mr R Walker
- Decision date
- 6 December 2001
- Person(s) or Company(s) involved
- Takeda Chemical Industries Limited
- Keywords
- Supplementary Protection Certificates
- Related Decisions
- None
Summary
The applicant filed 6 requests for the grant of an SPC in respect of products combining Lansoprazole and certain specified antibiotics, all the applications were based on a common marketing authorization but designated one each of a pair of basic patents. The examiner objected to all the applications on the grounds that the products were not afforded 'protection by a basic patent', as required by article 3(a) of the regulation and that the marketing authorization was not a valid authorization to place the product on the market as required by article 3(b).
To interpret the meaning of article 3(a) the applicant sought to equate protection with what would be infringed, however the hearing officer rejected this argument; Infringement, owing to unauthorised use of the products, being a consequence of the protection afforded to Lansoprazole, as only Lansoprazole was identifiable with the invention of the basic patents. In respect of the authorization the hearing officer found that it was not an authorization for a medicinal product comprising a combination of active ingredients but an authorization for an additional therapeutic indication of Lansoprazole. In so finding the hearing officer rejected all 6 requests for grant of an SPC on grounds of non-compliance with articles 3(a) and 3(b).