Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Argentina: The trade mark in the pharmaceutical product

Since the activity of the pharmaceutical industry is a regulated activity, in the sense that medicaments require governmental authorisation in order to be commercialised, registering the trade mark with the Trademark Office – as intellectual property right – is not sufficient to guarantee its use in the pharmaceutical product, because the name of the medicament must be accepted by a health authority at the time of issuance of the marketing and sales authorisation.

The criteria adopted by the health authority for approving the medicament's name is different from that of the Trademark Office. This difference exists in all legal systems of comparative law.

From the viewpoint of the trade mark as intellectual property right, and in terms of likelihood of confusion within trade marks of pharmaceutical products, the Argentine law does not contain specific rules related to the risk of confusion in the field of medicaments.

The most recent doctrine understands that each particular case should be analysed separately, in order to determine whether the common criteria – or either stricter or milder criteria – should be applied.

The health authority shall basically consider the risk entailed for the health, because in the event of potential likelihood of confusion and medication error, the element of trade mark or name of the product plays a significant role and affects physicians, pharmacists, and consumers.

In Argentina, in 1982, The Supreme Court of Justice, in its ruling "el Monaguillo SA v Province of Buenos Aires", distinguished the intellectual property right as guaranteed by the constitution, from its regulation and justified the fact than even when the trade mark was registered the regulatory authority could prohibit its use, in virtue of the existing double regulation. It emphasised, however, that the regulatory authority must apply the criteria in a reasonable manner.

Daniel R Zuccherino

Obligado & Cia

Paraguay 610, 17th Floor

C1057AAH, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Tel: +54 11 4114 1100

Fax: +54 11 4311 5675

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The easyJet owner’s trademark complaint says the band Easy Life has risked damage to the airline’s reputation through negative publicity
Jessica Kaiser tells Managing IP why she moved to Perkins Coie and how she wants to expand the firm’s PTAB practice
Lawyers at Allen & Overy provide some key takeaways from the UPC’s first few months
Speaking exclusively to Managing IP, Oliver Walsh said he is looking forward to developing cutting-edge enforcement solutions, including AI-powered predictive analysis
Johnson & Johnson won’t enforce patents for bedaquiline after months of public scrutiny and new licences for generics
We have published this year’s Corporate IP Stars list, an annual rankings publication which recognises senior in-house practitioners
The 2023 edition of Managing IP’s Rising Stars publication is now available online
Allison M Hester, attorney at Moye White, outlines Mattel's litigation history and explains what trademark lessons brands can learn from the toy company
The former BoA president won a high-profile race to succeed Christian Archambeau as executive director in July
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP professional about their life and career