Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 2 September 2010.

Kirin Amgen Inc. v Lietuvos Respublikos valstybinis patentų biuras.

Reference for a preliminary ruling: Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas - Lithuania.

Patent law - Proprietary medicinal products - Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 - Articles 7, 19 and 19a(e) - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Period for lodging the application for such a certificate.

Case C-66/09.


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
23/10/2010 Kirin Amgen
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2010:484
02/09/2010 Kirin Amgen
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2010:484
02/09/2010 Kirin Amgen
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2010:96
25/02/2010 Kirin Amgen
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
18/04/2009 Kirin Amgen
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

2010 I-07943

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas – Interpretation of Articles 3(b), 7(1), 13(1), 19 and 23 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (OJ 1992 L 182, p. 1) – Company holding a European patent and a Community marketing authorisation for a medicinal product, which applied for a supplementary protection certificate for that product – Determination of the commencement date of the period laid down for lodging an application for a supplementary protection certificate – Date on which the marketing authorisation was granted or date on which the regulation in question entered into force for Lithuania through its accession to the European Union

Systematic classification scheme

1.
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.11 Approximation of laws
    4.11.14 null
      4.11.14.03 null
        4.11.14.03.00


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 : paragraph 27
  • Treaty of Accession 2003 - Act, Article 2 : paragraphs 3, 39
  • Treaty of Accession 2003 - Act, Article 20 : paragraph 4
  • 12003TN02/04/C2 : paragraph 5
  • Directive 65/65 -A03 : paragraphs 13, 37
  • Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A61 : paragraph 18
  • Regulation 1768/92 : paragraphs 45, 48
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03 : paragraphs 7, 17
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03LB : paragraphs 36, 38, 40, 42, 43, 52
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03LD : paragraphs 17, 36
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07 : paragraphs 1, 17, 23, 28, 30, 35, 38, 42, 49, 53
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P1 : paragraphs 8, 21, 36
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13 : paragraph 17
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13P1 : paragraph 9
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19 : paragraphs 1, 10, 21 - 23, 25, 26, 30, 42, 47
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19BIS : paragraphs 5, 11, 24 - 26, 42, 47
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19BISLAPT2 : paragraph 51
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19BISLE : paragraphs 25, 28 - 30, 33, 35, 49, 52, 53
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19P2 : paragraph 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A20 : paragraph 10
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A21 : paragraph 10
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A22 : paragraph 10
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C10 : paragraph 6
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C6 : paragraph 6
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C7 : paragraph 6
  • Regulation 2309/93 : paragraph 53
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A12P1L1 : paragraphs 12, 34, 37
  • Directive 2001/83 -A04P3 : paragraphs 13, 37
  • Directive 2001/83 -A06P1 : paragraphs 13, 37
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -292/82 : paragraph 41
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -350/92 : paragraph 45
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -110/95 : paragraph 21
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -267/95 : paragraph 31
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -233/97 : paragraph 31
  • Court of Justice - Order C -17/98 : paragraph 18
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -127/00 : paragraphs 21, 22, 30, 36, 45 - 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -34/05 : paragraph 41
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -329/06 : paragraph 27
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -42/07 : paragraph 18
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/07 : paragraph 41
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -433/08 : paragraph 41

Operative part

  • Interprets : Regulation 1768/92 -A07
  • Interprets : Regulation 1768/92 -A19BISLE

Opinion

  • TFEU, Article 267 : point 49
  • Directive 65/65 : points 14, 25, 61, 63, 86
  • Directive 65/65 -A03 : point 16
  • Regulation 1768/92 : points 1, 2, 19, 20, 65, 87, 89
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A01P2 : point 7
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A02 : points 8, 25, 58, 82
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03 : point 26
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03LB : points 28, 79, 83, 85, 86, 94, 95
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A03LD : point 86
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A05 : point 27
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07 : points 42, 43, 48, 51, 52, 60, 62, 64, 65, 80, 85, 86
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A07P1 : point 28
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A10 : points 9, 58
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A13 : points 29, 90, 91, 93
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19 : points 30, 48, 51, 52, 68, 70 - 72, 75
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19P2 : point 54
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19BIS : points 10, 30, 59, 60, 68, 75, 76
  • Regulation 1768/92 -A19BISLE : points 6, 11, 31, 53, 55, 56, 62, 63, 66, 67, 74, 78, 95
  • Regulation 1768/92 -N2 : point 10
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C1 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C2 : point 21
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C3 : point 22
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C4 : point 22
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C5 : point 22
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C6 : point 23
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C7 : point 23
  • Regulation 1768/92 -C8 : point 24
  • Regulation 2309/93 : points 3, 15, 55, 61, 65
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A03 : points 78, 82, 94, 95
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A12P1 : point 16
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A12P3 : point 17
  • Regulation 2309/93 -A13P1 : point 18
  • Directive 2001/83 : points 14, 25
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -15/74 : point 19
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -258/81 : points 57, 84
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -350/92 : points 19, 45
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -267/95 : point 57
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -233/97 : points 57, 58
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -127/00 : points 52, 57, 70, 72
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -413/04 : point 76
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -420/06 : point 49
  • Court of Justice - Opinion C -482/07 : points 89, 91
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -482/07 : points 44, 45, 89


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 16/02/2009

Date of the Opinion

  • 25/02/2010

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

02/09/2010


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 90 from 18.04.2009, p.17

Judgment: OJ C 288 from 23.10.2010, p.11

Name of the parties

Kirin Amgen

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Meister, Marie: Confirmation du principe d'interprétation stricte du droit transitoire, Europe 2010 Novembre Comm. nº 11 p.35 (FR)
  2. Miscia, Valentina: Brevetti farmaceutici: l'interpretazione della Corte in materia di certificato protettivo complementare, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2011 p.171-176 (IT)
  3. Drazdauskas, Stasys: On Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 - application for the issue of a supplementary protection certificate for medical products and the interpretation of transnational provisions, LANDMARK IP DECISIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE 2008-2013 (Ed. Larcier - Brussels) 2014 p.66-72 (EN)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas - Lithuania

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

  • Lithuanian

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French