GROUP NO:2

PRESNTED BY: ROLL NO : 2,13,23,34,45,56

Agenda

 Summary of case
 Infringement

 Bayer’s view

 Cipla’s view
 Court’s decision
 Analysis and Conclusion
Summary
Infringement

 Infringement is an unauthorized use of an

invention claimed in a valid patent

 Permission may typically be granted in the

form of a license
BAYER’S VIEW

a) Section 48 of the Patent Act

b) Section 2 of the Drugs & Cosmetic Act

c) Patent Linkage System

CIPLA’S VIEW

• Role of DCGI in Patent Infringement

.
• Meaning of “Spurious Drug”

• Bayer’s intention to introduce patent

linkage system in India by judicial system

 COURT’S DECISION

 In favor of Cipla
 Court imposed fine of Rs.6,75,000 on Bayer
 D & C Act vs. Patent Act
 Patent Linkage System: Derogatory to consumer
rights and health policies
 Tactic to introduce public policies in a country
through court judgements
ANALYSIS OF DECISION

 Monopoly of innovator company

 Decision in favor of large public interest

 Court can’t introduce a law by passing orders
 Nexavar cost: 2.85 lakhs/ 120 tablets

 Cipla’s generic version : Leas than half of

Nexavar