Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2013:828
Date: 2013-12-12
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Intellectual, industrial and commercial property;Approximation of laws;Patents
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 12 December 2013 1. Approximation of laws — Uniform legislation — Industrial and commercial property — Patent right — Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products — Conditions for granting — Patent protecting a combination of several active ingredients — Marketing authorisation and supplementary protection certificate granted for a medicinal product containing that combination of active ingredients — Application for a certificate relating to one of those active ingredients which is individually protected by that patent — Lawfulness (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 469/2009, Arts 1(b) and (c) and 3(a) and (c)) 2. Approximation of laws — Uniform legislation — Industrial and commercial property — Patent right —Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products — Purpose (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 469/2009) 1. Article 3(c) of Regulation No 469/2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products must be interpreted as not precluding the holder of a basic patent and a marketing authorisation for a medicinal product consisting of a combination of several active ingredients who has already obtained a supplementary protection certificate for that combination of active ingredients, which is protected by that patent within the meaning of Article 3(a) of that regulation, from also obtaining a supplementary protection certificate for one of those active ingredients which is also protected as such, individually, by that patent. It is possible, in principle, on the basis of a patent which protects several different products, to obtain several supplementary protection certificates in relation to each of those different products, provided, inter alia, that each of those products is protected as such by that basic patent within the meaning of Article 3(a) of Regulation No 469/2009, in conjunction with Article 1(b) and (c) of that regulation, and is contained in a medicinal product with a marketing authorisation. (see paras 30, 41, operative part) 2. See the text of the decision. (see para. 36)