Comments
It is a ruling in the European Court of Justice involving consumer-goods company Philips and mobile-handsets maker Nokia. But the overseas ruling has brought some cheer to Indian drug-makers.
The ruling
Earlier this month, the ECJ had ruled that goods coming from non-member States that are imitations of goods protected in the European Union by a trade-mark right or copyright, or a related right or design, cannot be classified as “counterfeit goods” or “pirated goods” within the meaning of those regulations merely on the basis of the fact that they are brought into the customs territory of the European Union.
They would, in fact, infringe the rights mentioned only if it were proven that these goods were to be sold in the EU or advertised to customers in the EU, the ruling said.
The case
The European Court's ruling was made regarding two cases – regarding fakes of Nokia's phones from Hong Kong that transited through the UK with Columbia as its destination. The second case had to do with electric shavers similar to those from Philips, also from China but with no indication of the final destination. The consignment had been detained by Belgian authorities.
Drug seizures
The ECJ ruling assumes significance against the backdrop of several export consignments of Indian drug companies that had been seized at European ports – even though, the consignment was for a third country and it merely transited through Europe.
In 2008, 16 of 17 export seizures by Dutch authorities on the basis of EU regulation 1383/2003 were from India.
In fact, the Indian Government had cast its lot with the domestic drug makers and even took authorities in the Netherlands (where the goods had been seized) to the World Trade Organisation's Dispute Settlement Body. A truce was called when the EU authorities gave an assurance that guidelines would be formulated to allow Indian drug consignments to pass.
The latest ECJ ruling is entirely favourable to India's position at the WTO consultations/dispute, an industry expert observed.
“It establishes the basic principle that mere transit through the EU where there is an IP (intellectual property) right does not constitute the basis for seizure or detention.
“Much of the decision concerns the standards for proving and/or establishing suspicion that goods are actually intended to be diverted on to the EU market.
“Those standards are consistent with what India negotiated with the EU to resolve the dispute. While the decision does not expressly address patents, if anything the case is stronger on the patent side,” the expert added.
Domestic drug majors including Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Cipla and Ind-Swift had encountered seizures of their export consignments transiting through Europe, though it was meant for a different country.
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.