[Ip-health] Novartis loses battle for cancer drug patent

[Joana Ramos]

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/novartis-loses-battle-for-cance=
r-drug-patent/362951/

Novartis loses battle for cancer drug patent
PB Jayakumar / Mumbai July 05, 2009, 0:03 IST

Novartis=92s famed cancer drug, Glivec, will not get patent protection in
India. The apex body on patent and trademark disputes, the Intellectual
Property Appellate Board (IPAB), has ruled that the drug =93lacks
innovation=94 and the high price tag of Rs 1,20,000 per month per patient
would be too high for the common man. =93Any patent granted to support
such a high monopoly price would be against =91public order=92,=94 the ruli=
ng
said.


This brings the curtains down on a high profile three-year legal battle
over patent rights between the Swiss multinational drug major and the
Indian government.

The IPAB panel, comprising Chairman ZS Negi and Technical Member PC
Chakraborti, ruled that the beta crystalline version of the drug was not
patentable under section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act and lacked
=93significant enhanced efficacy=94 over and above the prior known molecule=
.
The panel, in its decision on June 26, also ruled that the patents
granted for the drug in about 40 countries may not be applicable to India.

In an e-mail response, Novartis said, =93We are pleased that IPAB
acknowledged that our patent application fulfils all international
patentability criteria. Unfortunately, IPAB upheld the objections under
Section 3(d), a legal provision unique to Indian patent law, which
constitutes a hurdle to innovation in the pharmaceutical field.=94

Novartis said it was concerned about the patent system in India and was
looking to have a system that supported innovation in the pharmaceutical
field. =93We are currently reviewing the decision and will look at the
various options available to us,=94 Novartis said.

Shubha Mudgal, executive director of Cancer Patient Aid Association,
which opposed the patent application in 2006, was predictably happy and
said the =93landmark judgement is a victory for patients as it will set a
precedent in India to offer critical drugs at affordable prices.=94

Patent expert Shamnad Basheer said in his blog spicyip that Section 3(d)
details that patents cannot be granted to an invention for commercial
exploitation which could be contrary to public order or cause morality
or harm the health of humans, animals and the environment.

--------------------
Joana Ramos, MSW
Cancer Resources & Advocacy
Seattle WA USA
+1-206-229-2420
http://ramoslink.info/
www.bmtbasics.org
www.healthyskepticism.org