Recent Developments in Compulsory Licensing of Pharmaceutical Patents in India
Requires Subscription or Fee PDF

Keywords

TRIPS
compulsory licence
pharmaceuticals
Indian Patents Act

Abstract

On March 9, 2012, under Section 84(1) of the Indian Patents Act, Controller General of Patents granted country’s first and only compulsory licence to Natco Pharma to sell Bayer AG’s patented oncology drug Nexavar (Sorafenib Tosylate). Since then, India has not issued any other compulsory licence even though two more such applications have been received. India has also implemented a special compulsory licence regime under Section 92A(1), for the manufacture and export of patented pharmaceutical products to any country having insufficient or no manufacturing capacity to address public health needs. In view of the recent developments, and given the economic consequences of compulsory licensing, it has become important for multinational pharmaceutical companies procuring patents and doing business in India to understand the country’s compulsory licensing laws and reevaluate their business strategies, while domestic companies pursue alternate options to access patented lifesaving medicines within the legal system.

https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb733
Requires Subscription or Fee PDF

Unless specified by prior arrangement, the author agrees to the following terms and assurances:

  1. For myself and on behalf of the other authors listed on this work, I assign to thinkBiotech LLC the copyright* in the contribution for the full term throughout the world.
  2. I/we further give to the following assurances
    1. I am the sole author of the contribution, or, if not, I have the written authority of the other authors to transfer the copyright* to thinkBiotech LLC and give these warranties;
    2. I and (where appropriate) the other authors are entitled to transfer the copyright to thinkBiotech LLC and no one else would be entitled to prevent us from publishing the contribution;
    3. To the best of my/our knowledge, all the facts in the contribution are true and accurate;
    4. The content of the contribution is entirely original to me (and where appropriate to the other authors) or, if not, the written permission of the owner of the copyright in any material copied from elsewhere has been obtained for all media (all such permissions to be attached to the contribution as supplementary files);
    5. Nothing in the contribution is obscene or libellous;
    6. Nothing in the contribution infringes any duty of confidentiality which I/or the other authors may owe to anyone else.
    7. I and/or the other authors have obtained the appropriate clearances from my/our employer(s) or other concerned institution(s).
* Works by US government employees prepared as part of official duties are in the public domain and the authors are therefore exempt from copyright assignment.