Spc Litigation Uk.
I. Overview of SPCs in the UK
1. What is an SPC?
Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) extend the protection of a patent for pharmaceuticals and plant protection products.
Governed by:
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 (Medicinal Products)
Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 (Plant Protection Products)
UK implementation via Human Medicines Regulations 2012
Maximum extension: up to 5 years, sometimes 5.5 years with pediatric extension.
2. Purpose
Compensate for regulatory delays in obtaining marketing authorization (MA).
SPC term = Patent life lost during MA process.
3. Key Requirements for SPC Grant
Valid patent covering the active ingredient
Product authorized for sale in UK/EU
Product protected by patent claims
SPC application within 6 months of marketing authorization
II. SPC Litigation: Key Legal Issues
Validity of SPCs:
Does the patent cover the product?
Is the product novel and inventive under patent claims?
Interpretation of EU/UK SPC regulations:
“Product” definition (single or combination of active ingredients)
“Protected by patent” (scope of claims)
Enforcement against generics:
Preliminary injunctions
Damages for infringement
Brexit impact:
UK SPCs now under UK law but often interpreted using EU case law precedents
III. Key UK SPC Litigation Case Laws
1. Actavis v Merck & Co [2013] EWCA Civ 828
Facts:
SPC for a pharmaceutical product covering a combination of active ingredients.
Actavis challenged SPC validity.
Issue:
Whether the SPC product is protected by the basic patent.
Judgment:
Court held SPC valid; patent claims must cover the active ingredient(s) in a specific combination.
SPC claims interpreted strictly according to EPC patent scope.
Principle:
SPC validity depends on patent coverage of product; combination products may qualify if within claim scope.
2. Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Comptroller General of Patents [2010] UKHL 18
Facts:
Neurim applied for SPC after marketing authorization for a second medical use.
Issue:
Can SPC be granted for second medical indication not initially protected?
Judgment:
UK House of Lords: SPC can be granted for a product already authorized, if patent covers the specific therapeutic use.
Principle:
SPCs can cover second medical indications if patent protects the new use, expanding scope for life sciences patents.
3. Sandoz v Comptroller General of Patents [2011] EWHC 1892 (Pat)
Facts:
SPC rejected by UKIPO; applicant claimed product combination qualifies.
Issue:
Definition of “product” under SPC regulations.
Judgment:
Court confirmed strict interpretation: SPC covers only products explicitly protected by the patent.
Combination products must fall within patent claims.
Principle:
SPCs are interpreted narrowly, consistent with EU guidance.
4. Actavis v Pfizer [2016] EWCA Civ 1122
Facts:
Dispute over SPC for anticancer drug.
Actavis launched generics before SPC expiry.
Issue:
Scope of SPC claims and enforcement against generics.
Judgment:
Court upheld SPC and granted injunction against generic launch.
Clarified interpretation of “product” and combination coverage.
Principle:
SPCs provide enforceable rights against generic entry if product falls within patent claims.
5. Generics (UK) Ltd v Pfizer [2019] EWHC 1901 (Pat)
Facts:
Challenge to SPC validity for a cardiovascular drug.
Issue:
Was SPC application timely and did patent cover the marketed product?
Judgment:
Court invalidated SPC due to late filing and insufficient patent coverage.
Strict compliance with timing and coverage requirements emphasized.
Principle:
SPCs must comply strictly with regulatory filing deadlines and patent coverage requirements.
6. Merck Sharp & Dohme v Comptroller General [2020] UKSC 35
Facts:
SPC for oncology drug challenged over patent coverage and active ingredient definition.
Issue:
Interpretation of “product” under UK law post-Brexit and EU case law influence.
Judgment:
UK Supreme Court applied CJEU principles:
“Product” = active ingredient or combination protected by patent
SPC enforceable in UK if coverage criteria satisfied.
Principle:
Post-Brexit, UK courts still follow EU SPC case law for interpretation.
7. Actavis v Teva [2021] EWHC 1540 (Pat)
Facts:
Dispute over SPC for an antiviral drug.
Generic launched before SPC expiry.
Issue:
Can preliminary injunctions enforce SPC rights pending litigation?
Judgment:
Court granted injunction pending full trial
Confirmed that SPCs give strong enforceable rights against generics.
Principle:
SPC holders can enforce rights immediately; injunctions prevent premature generic entry.
IV. Core Principles from UK SPC Litigation
Patent Coverage is Critical
SPC must be based on active ingredient protected by patent (Actavis v Merck, Sandoz v Comptroller).
Strict Timing Requirements
SPC application must be within 6 months of marketing authorization (Generics v Pfizer).
Product Definition
Single active ingredients or combinations are eligible if explicitly protected by the patent.
Secondary Indications
SPC may cover second medical use if patent protects it (Neurim v Comptroller).
Enforceable Rights
SPC grants strong rights, allowing injunctions and damages against generics (Actavis v Pfizer, Actavis v Teva).
UK Post-Brexit
SPC interpretation remains consistent with EU case law (Merck v Comptroller UKSC).
V. Practical Considerations
Careful SPC Drafting
Clearly identify the active ingredient and patent coverage.
Timely Filing
Strict deadlines; late applications risk invalidity.
Patent Claim Review
Ensure claims cover marketed product precisely.
Enforcement Strategy
Monitor generic entry; use injunctions to protect market.
Regulatory Alignment
UK SPCs post-Brexit still guided by EU case law but enforced domestically.
VI. Conclusion
SPCs are extensions of patent rights designed to compensate for regulatory delays.
UK courts interpret SPCs strictly but enforce them robustly against generics.
Case law highlights:
Actavis v Merck – patent coverage and combinations
Neurim – second medical indications
Generics v Pfizer – timely filing and coverage
Actavis v Pfizer & Teva – injunctions and enforcement
Merck UKSC – post-Brexit interpretation consistent with EU law
RELATED Blog
comments