[Ip-health] Beecham V Triomed -- Trademark -- GSK lost!

[Zackie Achmat]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Dear Jonny and All

In the rush of things, we missed this one.

GSK (SmithKline Beecham) sued the generic company Triomed for "copying" the=
 package insert of Augmentin. They won that case in the  Supreme Court of A=
ppeal (SCA).  In their greed, Beecham (GSK) then returned to the SCA to app=
eal a decision by the TPD dismissing their trade mark protection claim for =
the size and shape of the same drug. They lost.  A unanimous SCA dismissed =
GSK's case with costs. The case fundamentally restated the principles of th=
e European Court of Justice in similar matters.  The judgment is attached. =
The SCA called the case "yet another battle in the war concerning generic p=
harmacueticals." (para 1)

The courts are aware of attempts by drug companies to extend their patents =
indefinitely:

"3]       Since its patent in relation to the composition has expired, Beec=
ham no doubt wishes to protect its market in some other way and this case p=
rovides another illustration of the tension between competition principles =
(the right to compete and the right to copy) and intellectual property righ=
ts, and also between different types of intellectual property rights.  Ther=
e is an ever-increasing tendency to seek protection in a field not designed=
 or intended to cover the area.  This is not always particularly difficult =
since intellectual property rights, because of international developments, =
business realities and parliamentary involvement, may overlap or exist para=
llel to each other." Beecham Group PLC and SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceutica=
ls (PTY) LTD v Triomed (PTY) LTD (19 September 2002 Supreme Court of Appeal=
 unreported judgment)



Let's get on with it!!!



Regards



Zackie


--
[ Triomed Trademark September 2002.rtf of type application/msword deleted ]
--