Arrow Declarations: Here to Stay or a Flash in the Pan?
2018; Future Science Ltd; Volume: 7; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.4155/ppa-2018-0009
ISSN2046-8962
Autores Tópico(s)Intellectual Property and Patents
ResumoPharmaceutical Patent AnalystVol. 7, No. 4 CommentaryArrow declarations: here to stay or a flash in the pan?Dominic AdairDominic Adair*Author for correspondence: Tel.: +44 020 7400 8000; E-mail Address: dominic.adair@bristows.com Bristows, 100 Victoria Embankment, London EC4Y 0DHPublished Online:8 Jun 2018https://doi.org/10.4155/ppa-2018-0009AboutSectionsView ArticleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInReddit View articleKeywords: patentsclearance strategyArrow declarationadalimumabReferences1 Arrow Generics Ltd v Merck & Co, Inc, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 31 July 2007 EWHC 1900 (Pat) (2007).Google Scholar2 See for example, Actavis v Lilly, England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 21 May 2013 EWCA Civ 517 and Eli Lilly v Genentech England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 6 December 2017 EWHC 3104 (Pat) (2013).Google Scholar3 Gillette Safety Razor Co. v Anglo-American Trading Co., UK House of Lords, 3 September 1913 30 RPC 465 (1913).Crossref, Google Scholar4 Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co. Ltd v AbbVie Ltd, England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 12 January 2017 EWCA Civ 1 (2017).Google Scholar5 Fujifilm Kyowa Biologics Co. Ltd v AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 1 March 2016 EWHC 425 (Pat) (2016).Crossref, Google Scholar6 Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co. Ltd v AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 8 September 2016 EWHC 2204 (Pat) (2016).Crossref, Google Scholar7 Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co. Ltd v AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 29 December 2016 EWHC 3383 (Pat) (2016).Crossref, Google Scholar8 Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co. Ltd v AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 3 March 2017 EWHC 395 (Pat) (2017).Google Scholar9 Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan v Yeda Research & Development Company Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 26 October 2017 EWHC 2629 (Pat) (2017).Google Scholar10 GSK Group v Vectura Ltd, England & Wales High Court (Patents Court), 23 February 2018 EWHC 375 (Pat) (2018).Google Scholar11 Actavis UK Ltd v Eli Lilly and Company, UK Supreme Court, 12 July 2017 UKSC 48 (2017).Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Vol. 7, No. 4 Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics Downloaded 26 times History Received 9 March 2018 Accepted 13 March 2018 Published online 8 June 2018 Published in print July 2018 Information© 2018 Newlands PressKeywordspatentsclearance strategy Arrow declarationadalimumabFinancial & competing interests disclosureDE Adair is a partner of Bristows LLP. The author has no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.PDF download
Referência(s)