Bayer’s compulsory licence appeal date set

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Bayer’s compulsory licence appeal date set

India’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board will hear Bayer’s appeal of a controversial compulsory licence ruling on August 21 in Chennai, according to Pharmabiz.com

The Controller of Patents issued a compulsory licence in March to domestic generic drug maker Natco for the cancer treatment drug sorafenib.

The German pharmaceutical company filed its appeal with the country’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board on May 4.

The compulsory licence is in force for the remaining term of the patent licence and requires Natco to pay a royalty rate of 6% of net sales of the drug.

The Controller said in March that he was granting the compulsory licence on the grounds (a) that the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to the patented invention had not been satisfied, (b) that the patented invention was not available to the public at a reasonably affordable price, and (c) that the patented invention was not being worked in India.

Bayer attacked the Patent Controller’s ruling in a statement, saying that it “damages the international patent system and endangers pharmaceutical research”.

For more of Managing IP’s coverage of the case, click here and here. More details are available on Pharmabiz.com.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
A team from Cooley shares how they overturned a massive damages award by emphasising that the opposing company’s trade secrets claims were time-barred
Sponsored by Licks Attorneys
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants
Sponsored by Liu, Shen & Associates
Chunyu Cui and Ziqing Wu of Liu, Shen & Associates say recent trends in China’s intellectual property courts indicate alignment with international standards and send a clear signal to the global market
Gift this article