仿制药(帕罗西汀),或竞争法中专利的新的难以忍受的轻盈

Q2 Social Sciences
Patrick Actis Perinetto
{"title":"仿制药(帕罗西汀),或竞争法中专利的新的难以忍受的轻盈","authors":"Patrick Actis Perinetto","doi":"10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Generics represents the first instance in which the CJEU analysed the contentious pay-for-delay cases. The Court had to take position on the interplay between IPRs and competition law as well as on potential competition, on unlawful competition and on the general features of the competition law assessment. The answers provided are problematic in many respects. In particular, they risk to undermine the essence of the IPRs, by excluding any relevance of their validity within the competition law assessment. Following an illustration of the case-law concerning the relationship between competition and patent laws and a description of the relevant parts of Generics, this paper aims at discussing the reasons why the Court’s reasoning is hard to reconcile with (i) its own case-law concerning the application of regulatory provisions and of IPRs; (ii) the required assessment of the counterfactual and (iii) the relevance of only lawful competition within the competition law assessment.","PeriodicalId":52118,"journal":{"name":"European Competition Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generics (paroxetine), or the new unbearable lightness of patents in competition law\",\"authors\":\"Patrick Actis Perinetto\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Generics represents the first instance in which the CJEU analysed the contentious pay-for-delay cases. The Court had to take position on the interplay between IPRs and competition law as well as on potential competition, on unlawful competition and on the general features of the competition law assessment. The answers provided are problematic in many respects. In particular, they risk to undermine the essence of the IPRs, by excluding any relevance of their validity within the competition law assessment. Following an illustration of the case-law concerning the relationship between competition and patent laws and a description of the relevant parts of Generics, this paper aims at discussing the reasons why the Court’s reasoning is hard to reconcile with (i) its own case-law concerning the application of regulatory provisions and of IPRs; (ii) the required assessment of the counterfactual and (iii) the relevance of only lawful competition within the competition law assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Competition Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Competition Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Competition Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2021.1916212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要Generics是欧盟法院首次分析有争议的延迟支付案件。法院必须就知识产权与竞争法之间的相互作用以及潜在竞争、非法竞争和竞争法评估的一般特征采取立场。所提供的答案在许多方面都存在问题。特别是,它们有可能破坏知识产权的本质,因为它们在竞争法评估中排除了知识产权有效性的任何相关性。在举例说明竞争法和专利法之间关系的判例法以及对《通用》相关部分的描述之后,本文旨在讨论法院的推理难以与(i)其自己关于监管条款和知识产权适用的判例法相一致的原因;(ii)反事实的必要评估,以及(iii)在竞争法评估中仅合法竞争的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Generics (paroxetine), or the new unbearable lightness of patents in competition law
ABSTRACT Generics represents the first instance in which the CJEU analysed the contentious pay-for-delay cases. The Court had to take position on the interplay between IPRs and competition law as well as on potential competition, on unlawful competition and on the general features of the competition law assessment. The answers provided are problematic in many respects. In particular, they risk to undermine the essence of the IPRs, by excluding any relevance of their validity within the competition law assessment. Following an illustration of the case-law concerning the relationship between competition and patent laws and a description of the relevant parts of Generics, this paper aims at discussing the reasons why the Court’s reasoning is hard to reconcile with (i) its own case-law concerning the application of regulatory provisions and of IPRs; (ii) the required assessment of the counterfactual and (iii) the relevance of only lawful competition within the competition law assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Competition Journal
European Competition Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: The European Competition Journal publishes outstanding scholarly articles relating to European competition law and economics. Its mission is to help foster learning and debate about how European competition law and policy can continue to develop in an economically rational way. Articles published in the Journal are subject to rigorous peer review by leading experts from around Europe. Topics include: -Vertical and Conglomerate Mergers -Enlargement of the Union - the ramifications for Competition Policy -Unilateral and Coordinated Effects in Merger Control -Modernisation of European Competition law -Cartels and Leniency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信