The EU General Court holds that patent settlements may be deemed “pay-for-delay” agreements only if there are reverse payments, and the originator may not be held dominant if the market is not assessed rigorously (Servier)

The Servier judgments: patent settlements may be deemed “pay-for-delay” agreements, and thus by-object infringements of Article 101 TFEU only if Commission substantiates strong indication of “reverse payment” or “abnormal inducement” from the originator to the generic; further, the originator cannot be held dominant if Commission has not assessed relevant market rigorously. On 12 December 2018 the General Court of the EU (“GC”) has passed a set of parallel judgments (we will referrer to Case T-691/14,Servier and Others v. Commission and Case T-684/144,Krka v. Commission) on the incompatibility with Article 101 TFEU of a number of settlement agreements in patent disputes between Servier, which is the originator of Perindopril (a drug primarily intended for the treatment of hypertension and

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Portolano Cavallo (Milan)

Quotation

Enzo Marasà, The EU General Court holds that patent settlements may be deemed “pay-for-delay” agreements only if there are reverse payments, and the originator may not be held dominant if the market is not assessed rigorously (Servier), 12 December 2018, e-Competitions Bulletin December 2018, Art. N° 90103

Visites 72

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues