Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying blogpost on "CASE BRIEF: Novo Nordisk AS vs. Union of India & Ors."

CASE BRIEF: Novo Nordisk AS vs. Union of India & Ors.

Facts (with Timeline): On 4th October, 2013, Novo Nordisk (hereinafter referred to as “Patentee”) was issued patent IN 257402. On 29th September, 2014, which is five days prior to the expiry of one year from the date of grant, Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries (hereinafter referred to as “Opponent) filed a post-grant opposition to the issued patent IN 257402. On 21st August, 2019, the Opposition Board provided its recommendation to the learned Controller. On 25th September, 2019 and 26th September, 2019, the hearing…

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Case Brief: European Commission vs Union of Indian"

CASE BRIEF : European Commission vs. Union of India

Facts The Petitioner, the European Union filed two writ petitions seeking two of the orders passed by the Controller General of Patents to be set aside. The orders stated that two patent applications shall be treated as “deemed to be abandoned” under Section 21(1) of the Patent Act, 1970 (“Act”). The Petitioner, initially engaged a European law firm who then engaged a patent agent in India to prosecute their Indian Applications. Later in June, 2017 it engaged another European Firm…

Read more

h holder img   x

Novartis Case Review

  This Post was first published on 15th May, 2013.   NOVARTIS AG (APPELLANT) Vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS (RESPONDENTS) Decided by the Supreme Court of India, CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 2706-2716 OF 2013.   Brief Facts The Appellant, Novartis, filed an application for patent in 1998 for a crystalline salt form of Imatinib and its use in cancer treatment. It specifically claimed the methanesulfonic acid addition salt form of the compound, Imatinib, called as Imatinib Mesylate (commonly referred to as Glivac or…

Read more