The Indian Supreme Court in a landmark judgment on 1 April 2013 dismissed the plea of Novartis AG for grant of patent for the beta crystalline form of Imatinib mesylate. The Court did not find the product to have satisfied the relevant provisions of patentability laid down in the Indian Patents Act. Patents for pharmaceutical products have always triggered intense debate in India and other developing countries. The Indian Patent laws are fully compliant with the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). This article through the lens of the Court verdict analyses whether there was any real enhancement in therapeutic efficacy of the product as claimed by Novartis and whether Novartis resorted to evergreening. The article dwells on the possible implications of the judgment on investments in India; and innovations in research and development in the pharmaceutical sector. The article further observes that the Court has, while upholding the public health agenda of the state, judiciously interpreted the statutory provisions governing the grant of intellectual property rights for pharmaceutical products in India, in the patient versus patent debate.
Global Trade and Customs Journal