- Asia
- Automobile
- Bangladesh
- Biological Inventions
- Brand Valuation
- Competition Law
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Law
- Copyright
- Copyright Infringement
- Copyright Litigation
- Corporate Law
- Counterfeiting
- Design
- Digital Right Management
- Educational Conferences/ Seminar
- Fashion Law
- Hi Tech Patent Commercialisation
- Hi Tech Patent Litigation
- India
- Indonesia
- Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Property Protection
- IP Commercialization
- IP Licensing
- IP Litigation
- IP Practice in India
- IPAB
- IPAB Decisions
- Legal Issues
- Licensing
- Media & Entertainment Law
- Myanmar
- NCLT
- NEPAL
- News & Updates
- Patent Commercialisation
- Patent Filing
- patent infringement
- Patent Licensing
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Marketing
- Patent Opposition
- Patent Rule Amendment
- Patents
- pharma
- Pharma- biotech- Patent Commercialisation
- Pharma/Biotech Patent Litigations
- Section 3(D)
- Signapore
- TAX
- Technology
- Telecom Law
- Trademark
- Trademark Litigation
- Uncategorized
- USPTO
- Vietnam
Correct Interpretation of section 107A of the Indian Patents Act: Judgement in Bayer Vs. Natco & Alembic
In a recent decision, the Divisional bench of Delhi high court has dealt with correct interpretation of Section 107A of the Patents Act, 1970, commonly known as the Bolar provision.The ruling came as a result of two appeals made by Bayer Corp. Ltd. against the Natco Pharma and Alembic Pharmaceuticals for infringement of its patents … Continue reading Correct Interpretation of section 107A of the Indian Patents Act: Judgement in Bayer Vs. Natco & Alembic
Read more »Bayer Vs Cipla
BAYER Vs CIPLA & UNION OF INDIA Does a combined reading of the Drug Control Act and the Patents Act lead to an inference that no marketing approvals can be granted to a third party for a drug/formulation for which a patent exists? This was a primary question before the Delhi High Court in a … Continue reading Bayer Vs Cipla
Read more »