Preliminary injunction based on a combination product SPC is denied by Athens court
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 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement
Expert AnalysisLocal Insights

Preliminary injunction based on a combination product SPC is denied by Athens court

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
monument-2011140.jpg

Constantinos Kilimiris of Patrinos & Kilimiris calls for clarity on how to apply the SPC Regulation with regard to combination products after a Greek case appeared to overturn national case law on the matter

A recent decision by the Athens First Instance Single Member Court, hearing a request for a preliminary injunction (PI) based on a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) for a pharmaceutical product combining two active ingredients, seems to overturn national case law on the interpretation of Article 3 (c) of the SPC Regulation.

Case background and ruling

The PI application was filed by an originator company alleging infringement of its combination SPC by a generic company attempting to launch its product at risk.

The defence of the generic company was to challenge the validity of the combination SPC. The generic company alleged that:

  • The SPC was granted in violation of Article 3 (c) of the SPC Regulation as another SPC had already been granted for the first active ingredient of the marketed combination; and

  • The basic patent could not be interpreted as disclosing the active ingredients’ combination as a separate, independent invention.

While the reasoning of the decision is not very clear, it seems that the Athens court based its decision on Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case law, C-443/12 and C-577/13, looking into whether the combination of active ingredients could be regarded as an independent invention of the basic patent. It ruled that this is not the case and, accordingly, that an SPC had already been granted for the same invention. Thus, the combination SPC was granted in violation of Article 3 (c) of the SPC Regulation and was invalid.

Analysis of the decision

This decision is contrary to previous case law from the same court, which, in hearing a PI application based on a combination SPC, had found that the grant of a combination SPC had not violated Article 3 (c) of the SPC Regulation as it was sufficient that the combination be expressly mentioned in the claims, without examining whether the combination could be regarded as an independent invention.

While it is true that the national case law on this issue is divergent among EU member states, it also seems that the Greek case law on this matter is far from settled. Given that referrals are pending on the same issue before the CJEU, one should hope for some clarity on how to apply the SPC Regulation in practice as regards combination products.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The firm was among multiple winners at a record-breaking 2024 ceremony held in London on April 11
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The Americas research cycle has commenced. Do not miss this opportunity to nominate your work!
Increased and new patent fees could affect prosecution strategies for law firms and companies, according to sources
Five former Oblon lawyers felt that joining Merchant & Gould would help them offer the right prices to entice clients
The UK may not be a UPC member but its firms are still acting in proceedings, with Carpmaels among the most prominent
Naomi Pearce of Pearce IP shares how she is helping her firm become a life sciences leader and how generous policies have helped attract top talent
The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal filed by Ocado, in what was a key test for transparency at the new court
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP lawyer or professional about their life and career
INTA is calling out ‘immoral’ unregistered attendees at the association’s annual meeting, but the debate is more nuanced
Gift this article