A victory for global public health in the Indian Supreme Court.
نویسنده
چکیده
On 1 April of this year, the Indian Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Indian Patent Office to refuse the patent grant for Novartis imatinib mesylate (Gleevec). The patent application failed to meet the requirements for patentability under Indian law. The global public health community followed the case closely. Its outcome could affect the Indian generics industry - an important supplier of low cost medicines to the developing world.
منابع مشابه
13 Still separate , still unequal
Four decades after the civil rights revolution began with the Supreme Court’s unanimous 1954 school desegregation decision, Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court reversed itself in the 1990s, authorizing school districts to return to segregated and unequal public schools.... The new policies refl ected the victory of the conservative movement that altered the federal courts and turned ...
متن کامل“To patent or not to patent? the case of Novartis’ cancer drug Glivec in India”
BACKGROUND Glivec (imatinib mesylate), produced by the pharmaceutical company Novartis, is prescribed in the case of chronic myeloid leukemia, one of the most common blood cancers in eastern countries. After more than a decade of legal battles surrounding its patentability, the Supreme Court of India gave its final decision on April 1st of 2013, rejecting the appeal of the Swiss giant drug manu...
متن کاملAn appeal to humanity: legal victory in favour of North America's only supervised injection facility: Insite
Canada's federal government has once again failed to shut North America's only authorized supervised injection facility: Insite. A majority ruling issued by the BC Court of Appeal on 15 January 2010 upheld an earlier British Columbia Supreme Court ruling in 2008 that protected the rights of injection drug users (IDUs) to access Insite as a health facility as per the Charter of Rights and Freedo...
متن کاملWebster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)
In the 1989 case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Missouri law regulating abortion [3] care. The Missouri law prohibited the use of public facilities, employees, or funds to provide abortion [3] counseling or services. The law also placed restrictions on physicians who provided abortions. A group of physicians affected by the law ch...
متن کاملImplications and reflections on the 2010 Supreme Court ruling on Canada’s AHR Act
In December, 2010, Canada's 6 year old Assisted Human Reproduction Act was successfully challenged in the Supreme Court of Canada. There may be important implications for public health and the evolution of reproductive technologies in this country.
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of public health policy
دوره 34 3 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013