The Growing Irrelevance of a TRIPS Challenge to India’s Patent Law
Prof. Won-Mog Choi (Eds), International Economic Law: Asia Pacific Perspectives, published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing, London (2015)
28 Pages Posted: 14 May 2016
Date Written: October 13, 2015
This paper has some modest objectives. It’s an attempt to examine whether or not India’s actions are within the confines of the TRIPS Agreement, notwithstanding the fact that it has creatively crafted provisions in its patent law to balance the concerns of innovation access. To these ends, it examines in detail the following three controversies: (i) Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter: IPA, 1970), including the Indian Supreme Court’s decision in Novartis v. Union of India, and its consistency with the TRIPS Article 27.1; (ii) the legal provision and decision involving the grant of compulsory license on Bayer’s drug ‘Nexavar’, on the grounds of ‘working’ and its consistency with Article 27.1 and other provisions of the TRIPS Agreement; (iii) the provision involving the revocation of patents in the ‘public interest’, and its consistency with Article 32 and other provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.
Keywords: TRIPS, Patents, Pharmaceuticals, Revocation, Compulsory Licence, India
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation