- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-518/10: Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 November 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) — Yeda Research and Development Company Ltd, Aventis Holdings Inc v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure — Medicinal products for human use — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Article 3 — Conditions for obtaining a certificate — Concept of a ‘product protected by a basic patent in force’ — Criteria — Marketing authorisation — Medicinal product placed on the market containing only one active ingredient whereas the patent claims a combination of active ingredients)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CB0518
62010CB0518
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 73/8
(Case C-518/10) (<a id="ntc1-C_2012073EN.01000802-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2012073EN.01000802-E0001"> (<span class="super">1</span>)</a>
(Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure - Medicinal products for human use - Supplementary protection certificate - Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 - Article 3 - Conditions for obtaining a certificate - Concept of a ‘product protected by a basic patent in force’ - Criteria - Marketing authorisation - Medicinal product placed on the market containing only one active ingredient whereas the patent claims a combination of active ingredients)
2012/C 73/13
Language of the case: English
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Yeda Research and Development Company Ltd, Aventis Holdings Inc
Defendant: Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Court of Appeal (Civil Division) (England and Wales) — Interpretation of Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (<a href="./../../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:L:2009:152:TOC">OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1</a>) — Conditions for obtaining a certificate — Definition of ‘product protected by a basic patent in force’ — Criteria — Effect of Agreement 89/695/EEC relating to Community patents on the evaluation of those criteria if there is indirect or contributory infringement for the purpose of Article 26 of that agreement
Operative part of the order
Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products must be interpreted as precluding the competent industrial property office of a Member State from granting a supplementary protection certificate where the active ingredient specified in the application, even though identified in the wording of the claims of the basic patent as an active ingredient forming part of a combination in conjunction with another active ingredient, is not the subject of any claim relating to that active ingredient alone.
(<span class="note"><a id="ntr1-C_2012073EN.01000802-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2012073EN.01000802-E0001">*1</a></span>) Language of the case: English.