AG weighs in on SPCs in Teva v Gilead opinion
Advocate General Wathelet has rejected the UK court’s suggestion that “core inventive advance” is a relevant consideration in determining whether a basic patent protects an active ingredient within the meaning of Article 3(a)
Advocate General Wathelet has provided
an opinion in the Teva v Gilead case in which a UK court
referred a question regarding supplementary certificates (SPCs)
to the CJEU.
The High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Chancery
Division (Patents Court)...
Please log in
to read the rest of this article. New to Managing Intellectual Property?
Take advantage of free access to up to 5 articles on Managing IP and become a member today. It’s free to join and the benefits start straight away.
Please make sure you log in to read the rest of the article.
Join us nowGain FREE access to up to five free articles when you register now.