On 25 March 2021, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") dismissed all the appeals against the European Commission's decision to fine Lundbeck and several other companies for entering into anti-competitive patent settlement agreements. [1] The judgments largely repeat the position taken by the ECJ in its January 2020 Paroxetine judgment. They notably confirm that: the concept of a restriction by object of Article 101 should be interpreted narrowly; patent settlement agreements cannot automatically be considered a restriction by object, even if they include a value transfer from the originator to the generic; however, where the value transfers cannot have any explanation other than as a reflection of the commercial interests of the parties not to compete, the agreement can restrict
Share on
|
|
The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several manufacturers of medicines involved in an agreement seeking to delay the marketing of the generic antidepressant citalopram (Lundbeck)
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.
