On March 25, 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union published its judgments in the Lundbeck case. The CJEU dismissed the parties’ appeals in their entirety and upheld the General Court’s findings that Lundbeck and the generic manufacturers were potential competitors and that each of the patent settlement agreements entered into by the parties restricted competition “by object.” The CJEU’s legal analysis is largely based on its judgment from January 30, 2020 in the Paroxetine case. The CJEU nevertheless provides useful clarifications specific to the Lundbeck agreements and establishes a (novel) “specific duty of care” requiring companies to properly retain evidence, which may impact companies beyond the pharmaceutical sector. This article provides an overview of the CJEU’s analysis and sets out some practical implications for companies to consider.

By Marie Manley & Anne Robert1

            

On March 25, 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) published six judgments assessing the patent settlement agreements entered into between Lundbeck (Case C-591/16 P) and several manufacturers of generic medicines. The CJEU dismissed the parties’ appeals in their entirety. It upheld the findings of the General Court (“GC”) that Lundbeck and the generic manufacturers were potential competitors and that each of the agreements restricted competition “by object” in viol

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!