Africa: Uganda exercises TRIPS flexibilities for pharmaceutical products

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Africa: Uganda exercises TRIPS flexibilities for pharmaceutical products

The Ugandan Patent Office has recently objected to the grant of patents for pharmaceutical inventions following notification of grant by the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO), where Uganda is a designated state. This objection is based on the national patent law of Uganda as it relates to the flexibilities regarding the application of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) to pharmaceutical products in least developed countries (LDCs).

The Harare Protocol was adopted in 1982. As a result of this, ARIPO is empowered to grant patents on behalf of its contracting states. Currently, there are 18 contracting states that may be designated in an ARIPO patent application. When filing an ARIPO application, an applicant is required to designate the member states where protection is required. The official fees payable, as well as renewal fees (which are also paid on pending ARIPO applications) are directly linked to the number of member states designated.

A patent granted by ARIPO has, in each designated state, the same effect as a patent granted under the applicable national law. Once the ARIPO office decides to grant a patent, each designated member country is notified of the decision and has a six month period in which to notify ARIPO that the patent will have no effect in its territory due to the invention not being patentable under the provisions of the Harare Protocol, or the national law of the member country because of the nature of the invention.

According to the Harare Protocol, claims related to medical indications or use must be drafted in one or more of the prescribed formats. The protocol makes it clear that claims directed to methods of medical treatment or diagnosis performed on the human or animal body are not permissible. However, the prescribed formats do allow for the patentability of substances or compositions for use in such methods, as well as so-called Swiss-type claims.

Recently, in response to a notification of a decision to grant issued by ARIPO, the Ugandan Patent Office has indicated that patents directed to pharmaceutical inventions are excluded from patent protection and will not be granted in Uganda based on Section 8(3)(f) of the Ugandan Industrial Property Act 2014, which reads:

"8(3) The following shall not be regarded as inventions and shall be excluded from patent protection-

(f) pharmaceutical products and test data until 1st January 2016 or such other period as may be granted to Uganda or least developed countries by the Council responsible for administering the Agreement on trade related aspects of intellectual property under the World Trade Organization."

The Council of the World Trade Organization, which administers the TRIPS Agreement, has agreed that LDCs have the option to exclude pharmaceutical products from patent protection and has extended the period to exercise this exclusion until 1 January 2033.

It is clear that Uganda is exercising its right to exclude patent protection for pharmaceutical products. It is thus recommended that Uganda is not designated in an ARIPO application concerning pharmaceutical products.

truluck-chyreene.jpg

Chyreene Truluck


Spoor & Fisher South Africa

11 Byls Bridge BoulevardBuilding No. 14Highveld Ext 73Centurion, Pretoria0157 South AfricaTel: +27 12 676 1272Fax: + 27 12 676 1100info@spoor.co.ukwww.spoor.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lateral hires at Thompson Hine and Pierson Ferdinand said they were inspired by fresh business opportunities and innovative strategies at their new firms
The launch of a new IP insurance product and INTA hiring a former USPTO commissioner were also among the top talking points this week
The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
A boom in transactional work and a heightened awareness of IP have helped boost revenue for the rebranded commercial services team
Clemens Heusch, head of global litigation and dispute resolution at Nokia, tells us why open conversations – and respectful challenges – lead to the best results
Gift this article