Bad faith: Recommendations and Nullity
Introduction
Within the amounts indicated in art.74 The price of the license could be included and any concept that can save a certain relationship and justification regarding the marketing of the product. Generally, through this formula, greater compensation is achieved. Another particularities for the calculation of compensation based on this article, is that based on those territories where the patent is applicable, the holder can request that the market share that you have seen reduced from itsproduct or effect that a new competitor has been able to have regarding its PVL.
Developing
In this case, there is no evidence that you have had to reduce your PVL, so you must prove that assumption if you want to claim compensation for said concept. Geiser Pharma has formalized various contracts with multiple clients for the marketing of the product based on Sevsan, both nationally and internationally. After a rigorous examination of the clauses contained therein, it is concluded that there is no assumption in which Geiser Pharma must respond to his partners clients.
This is because at the time when all contracts were held based on this molecule, the patent had not been approved, so there was no patent that affects the dose or right that was being infringed. At the same time, in the contract clauses it is indicated that Geiser Pharma will respond for the infraction of patent that could be incurred at the time of the signing of the contract in the place of manufacture of the product, a fact that in this case did not happen.
recommendations
To try to minimize the possible existence of a demand for patent violation, it is advisable not. In the event that, due to marketing or business strategy, it is necessary.
Nullity
Title X of Law 24 2015 of patents includes the causes of nullity in its article 102 and contemplates how one of them is the non -concurrence of any of the patentability requirements contained in Title II. In this case, the non -concurrence of the requirement of the novelty art could be defended. 6. As indicated in the patent analysis, the treatment of the cough symptom was already known in the state of the technique before the patent was presented.
That is, it was already known that the Sevsan molecule had an effect on the inflammation of the throat and that, therefore, some of the symptoms associated with it, such as cough, could also be diminished. The patent that generates controversy aims.
Since the exercise of the nullity action can be exercised throughout the legal life of the patent, it could be proposed by the nullity of the patent based on the absence of novelty regarding the claims contained therein, especially the 1 claim. In the event that the patent was declared void, it would be considered that it was never valid, it will be considered that it never had effects and compensation for damages and losses could be claimed in case the head of the patent had acted in bad faith.
conclusion
Article 144 contemplates the possibility of opposing the patent application by establishing that within two months of the publication of the application any person may formulate opposition, claiming the lack of any of the legal requirements required for their concession, including the novelty, inventive activity, industrial application or sufficiency of the description. The lack of legitimation of the applicant may not be alleged, which must be asserted before the ordinary courts. This option is not applicable in the present case, given that the deadline since the application was submitted has already elapsed.
Leave feedback