ECJ Advocate General Wathelet concludes that payment of royalties under a licence agreement where the patent was held invalid may be compatible with Article 101 TFEU (Genentech / Hoechst)

On 17 March 2016, Advocate General Wathelet issued his opinion on a request for a preliminary ruling from the Paris Court of Appeal, which inquired as to whether Article 101 TFEU precludes a licensee from paying royalties pursuant to a licensing agreement when the patent, which is the subject of that licensing agreement, has been held invalid (C-567/14, Genentech Inc. v Hoechst GmbH). The underlying proceedings involve a long-running patent dispute between Behringwerke, the licensor (of which Sano-Aventis Deutschland, a subsidiary of Hoechst, is a successor) and Genentech Inc. (“Genentech”), the licensee, a subsidiary of Roche. The origin of the dispute lies in a licence agreement signed in 1992 granting the licensee a world-wide non-exclusive licence for the use of a patented

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

Quotation

Peter L'Ecluse, ECJ Advocate General Wathelet concludes that payment of royalties under a licence agreement where the patent was held invalid may be compatible with Article 101 TFEU (Genentech / Hoechst), 17 March 2016, e-Competitions Bulletin Competition in the Pharmaceutical sector, Art. N° 78995

Visites 188

All issues

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