Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 December 2011.

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt.

Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundespatentgericht - Germany.

Intellectual and industrial property - Patents - Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 - Article 13 - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Possibility of granting that certificate where the period that has elapsed between the date of the lodging of the basic patent application and the first marketing authorisation in the European Union is less than five years - Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 - Article 36 - Extension of the duration of the supplementary protection certificate.

Case C-125/10.


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
20/01/2012 Merck Sharp & Dohme
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2011:812
08/12/2011 Merck Sharp & Dohme
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2011:812
08/12/2011 Merck Sharp & Dohme
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2011:377
09/06/2011 Merck Sharp & Dohme
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
19/06/2010 Merck Sharp & Dohme
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

2011 I-12987

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.11 Approximation of laws
    4.11.02 Uniform laws
      4.11.02.01 Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • Regulation 1768/92 : paragraphs 24, 31, 33, 36, 38
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03 : paragraphs 6, 30
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07 : paragraph 30
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P1 : paragraph 7
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A08 : paragraphs 8, 30
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A08P1LDPT1 : paragraph 8
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A09 : paragraph 30
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A10 : paragraph 30
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A10P1 : paragraph 9
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A10P2 : paragraph 9
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13 : paragraphs 10, 12, 26, 29, 34, 45
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P1 : paragraphs 28, 35, 37, 40, 41
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P3 : paragraphs 25, 35, 36
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A14LA : paragraph 11
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C1 : paragraphs 3, 31
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C2 : paragraphs 3, 31
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C3 : paragraphs 4, 32
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C4 : paragraphs 4, 32
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C5 : paragraph 4
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C8 : paragraphs 5, 32, 35
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C9 : paragraphs 5, 33
  • Regulation 1901/2006 : paragraphs 29, 34 - 39, 42, 44
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A36 : paragraphs 8, 25 - 27, 37, 45
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A36P1 : paragraphs 14, 36
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A36P4 : paragraph 14
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -C26 : paragraphs 13, 34
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -C27 : paragraphs 13, 36
  • Regulation 469/2009 : paragraphs 12, 23, 24
  • Regulation 469/2009 -A13P1 : paragraph 1
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -127/00 : paragraph 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -482/07 : paragraphs 29, 31 - 33

Operative part

  • Interprets : Regulation 1768/92 -A13
  • Interprets : Regulation 1901/2006 -A36

Opinion

  • Directive 65/65 -A03 : point 3
  • Regulation 1768/92 : points 6, 13, 14, 16, 17, 41, 47, 54, 57, 60, 65, 69, 71 - 87
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03 : points 19, 53
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A04 : point 20
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A05 : point 20
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07 : points 53, 62, 64
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P1 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P3 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P4 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A08 : points 22, 53, 62, 64
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A08P1 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A09 : point 64
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A10 : points 23, 56, 64
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A11 : point 56
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13 : points 7, 24, 55, 56, 63, 64
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P1 : points 51, 67
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P2 : points 51, 79
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P3 : point 52
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A14LA : point 25
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C8 : point 18
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C9 : point 18
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A03 : point 3
  • Regulation 1901/2006 : points 1, 87
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A07 : point 63
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A08 : point 63
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -A36 : points 27, 52, 63
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -C26 : point 26
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -C27 : point 26
  • Regulation 1901/2006 -C28 : point 26
  • Regulation 469/2009 : point 16
  • Regulation 469/2009 -A13P1 : point 39
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -127/00 : point 62


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 09/03/2010

Date of the Opinion

  • 09/06/2011

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

08/12/2011


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 161 from 19.06.2010, p.17

Judgment: OJ C 32 from 04.02.2012, p.6

Name of the parties

Merck Sharp & Dohme

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Idot, Laurence: Certificat complémentaire de protection, Europe 2012 Février Comm. nº 2 p.38-39
  2. Bijvank, K.M.L.: ABC's met negatieve beschermingsduur, Berichten industriële eigendom 2012 p.106-107
  3. Kupecz, A.F.: Intellectuele eigendom & Reclamerecht 2012 p.374-375



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Bundespatentgericht - Germany

Subject-matter

  • Approximation of laws
  • Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
  • - Patents

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

deuxième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Lõhmus

Advocate General

Bot

Language(s) of the Case

  • German

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French