Differential pricing: Reconciling IP rights

The after-effects of the decision allowing Cipla to continue with the manufacture and sale of the patented drug “Tarceva” of Roche, has led big pharma to resort to differential pricing.

Roche had filed an infringement suit against Cipla over its patent for Tarceva, and as a counterclaim, Cipla had argued for the invalidity of the patent on the grounds of it being anticipated by the prior art.

The court, upon its finding that the Roche case, though arguable and disclosing prima facie merit had to answer a credible challenge to the patent raised by Cipla, turned its focus to balancing the convenience of the parties.

Abhai Pandey is a lawyer with LEX ORBIS IP Practice, a law firm specializing in intellectual property issues.