| The Indian Patent Appellate Board (IPAB) on Tuesday reserved judgement on Novartis’ appeal challenging the appointment of former Controller General of Patents S Chandrasekhar as a technical member of IPAB, which is hearing its appeal against the Indian patent office’s move to not allow patent protection to its anti-cancer drug Glivec in India.
|
| |
| The Swiss pharma major had objected to the composition of the IPAB patents cell on the grounds that Chandrasekhar was Controller General of Patents when the company’s original application for Glivec was rejected.
|
| |
| Chandrasekhar joined IPAB a few months ago, following his retirement from the IP office.
|
| |
| Arguing on behalf of Novartis, senior counsels Shanthi Bhusan and Habibullah Basha submitted that the technical cell could have one more technical member in addition to Chandrasekhar or the tribunal could ask the government to appoint another person.
|
| |
| The Patents Act allows only one judicial member and one technical member at present.
|
| |
| Additional Solicitor General V T Gopalan, arguing on behalf of the Centre and Controller General of Patents before the tribunal, defended the appointment of Chandrasekhar as technical member of IPAB.
|
| |
| He contended that Novartis should have made its objection when the case was shifted to the appellate board. Since it had failed to do that, it was not right to raise the issue now, he added.
|
| |
| He argued that once a statutory order was passed, the tribunal should start hearing the case without asking for appointing another person.
|
| |
| IPAB is hearing the patent case following a decision of the Madras High Court to transfer one of the cases – on the decision of the Chennai patent office to reject the Glivec patent – to IPAB. |
| |
|
| |
Content Guide
