Hogan Lovells v Bayer comes under Bonadio's microscope

"Supplementary Protection Certificates for Plant Protection Products and Provisional Marketing Authorization: The ECJ’s Decision in Lovells v. Bayer" is the title of a four-page case note by Enrico Bonadio (an enthusiastic and talented young lecturer at the City University, London) on the recent ruling of the Court of Justice in Case C-229/09 Hogan Lovells International LLP v Bayer CropScience AG (noted here by The SPC Blog).

This note is published in issue 1 for 2011 of the European Journal of Risk Regulation (EJRR) at pp 115-118. In its concluding passage Enrico writes:

"... it iseasy to understand why the ECJ has not interpreted Article 3(1)(b) Regulation 1610/96 as prohibiting the issue of SPCs on the basis of provisional authorizations only. Indeed, any such interpretation would have had dangerous spill-over effects, i.e. beyond the specific issue of the invalidity of the SPC in Lovells v Bayer. For example, most SPCs in the EU – having been granted on the basis of provisional approvals – could have been invalidated upon the request of anyone: and this would have entailed serious economic consequences for the plant protection industry that relies so heavily on patent protection and particularly on SPCs".

Over the years there have been too few academic scholars taking an interest in the legal rather than the commercial side to patent extension issues. This blog welcomes Enrico's interest and hopes that it will continue to grow.