Novartis vs Indian Patents Act - Case decoded - Views on News from Equitymaster

Helping You Build Wealth With Honest Research
Since 1996. Try Now

  • MyStocks


Login Failure
(Please do not use this option on a public machine)
  Sign Up | Forgot Password?  

Novartis vs Indian Patents Act - Case decoded

Apr 5, 2012

In 1997, Novartis AG filed a patent application in India for the beta-crystalline of 'imatinib mesylate'. The brand name for the same, given by Novartis, is Glivec. The patent application for Glivec was done on the basis that the company invented imatinib mesylate. Until 2005 this application of Novartis did not make much headway. However India introduced the Indian Patent Act from 2005 and also introduced an important provision which prevented ever-greening and granting of frivolous patents (section 3(d) of Indian Patents Act). Ever-greening refers to strategies by which, innovator companies try to retain/extend their product patents even after they expire.

Even before the Indian government considered Novartis' patent application, some generics companies along with the Cancer Patients Aids Association (CPAA) opposed Novartis' patent application for Glivec. The opposition was based on the reasons that imatinib was already a discovered form of medicine and did not improve any effectiveness. In January 2006, the Patent Controller finally gave a decision against Novartis stating that the application lacked novelty and was not patentable under section 3(d). This meant that the generics companies could produce the same medicine.

Unhappy with the Patent Controller's decision, the company filed the case in the High court against the Indian government and 4 other Indian generics companies. Here, Novartis challenged two main aspects

  • Novartis challenged the Patent Controller's decision of not allowing the patent on Glivec. This was ultimately transferred to Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), a body which deals with special matters of intellectual property.

  • Novatis also challenged the validity of section 3(d) in the Indian Patents act, which prevents ever-greening and granting of frivolous patents.
The High court rejected Novartis' claims and stated that section 3(d) is quite clear and is constitutionally valid. On the other aspect, IPAB overturned Patents Controller's findings and held that Glivec was new and involved an inventive step. However, IPAB concluded that the invention did not satisfy the tests of section 3(d) of "significantly enhanced therapeutic efficacy" and thus ruled against Novartis.

Again, Novartis challenged the IPAB's order in the Supreme Court and the hearing began in August 2011. Since then there have been high voltage arguments from both the sides (for and against) and the Supreme Court has scheduled the final arguments to be discussed from 10 July 2012.

What does this mean for both MNC and Indian players?

The outcome of this lengthy battle by Novartis can have far reaching effects on the future stakeholders of Indian Pharma - Generic pharma, Innovator Pharma and the Indian people. A ruling in favor of Novartis will mean strong monetary gains for innovators like itself. It will also mean a strong incentive to invest in R&D. At the same time, it will negatively affect the pharma generic players in a big way and limit their scope of product expansion in the domestic market. However, the biggest jolt will come to the people of India in the form of higher medicine cost.

Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Novartis vs Indian Patents Act - Case decoded". Click here!


More Views on News

This Stock Just Made a Historical Debut on the Exchanges (Views On News)

Nov 15, 2021

Shares of the company listed at premium of 253% from its IPO price, the highest ever.

3 Indian Pharma Companies that are Investing Big Time for the Future (Views On News)

Nov 9, 2021

In 2021, R&D of pharma companies roared to life in a never-before-seen way.

Demerger of Financial & Pharma Businesses puts Piramal Enterprises in Limelight (Views On News)

Oct 8, 2021

The company's shareholders will be issued 4 shares in the demerged entity for every 1 held in Piramal Enterprises.

Block Deal Disappoints Max Healthcare Shareholders. Stock Falls 6% (Views On News)

Sep 30, 2021

The divestment of 6.6% stake by the promoter is considered to be one of the largest block deals of the market.

5 Indian Pharma Companies Riding the Vaccination Wave (Views On News)

Sep 3, 2021

These companies are likely to benefit the most from Covid-19 vaccines.

More Views on News

Most Popular

Infosys vs TCS: Which is Better? (Views On News)

Nov 26, 2021

In the post pandemic era, the top two IT companies in India are fighting to capture the growing demand for IT.

This Multibagger Stock Zooms 20% After Dolly Khanna Buys Stake (Views On News)

Nov 24, 2021

Shares of this edible oil company zoomed over 50% in three days after ace investor bought around 1% stake.

Don't Sell these Stocks if the Market Falls (Profit Hunter)

Nov 17, 2021

These are the 3 types of stocks that you should not sell in a market crash.

How to Find Your Next 10-Bagger in this Market (Profit Hunter)

Nov 19, 2021

The #1 make or break factor in your portfolio you shouldn't ignore.

6 Popular Stocks that Turned into Penny Stocks (Views On News)

Nov 27, 2021

A look at popular stocks that crashed big time and never recovered, i.e. which went from 'Multibaggers to Multibeggers'.


Become A Smarter Investor
In Just 5 Minutes

Multibagger Stock Guide 2022
Get our special report Multibagger Stocks Guide (2022 Edition) Now!
We will never sell or rent your email id.
Please read our Terms


Nov 30, 2021 (Close)


  • Track your investment in NOVARTIS with Equitymaster's Portfolio Tracker. Set live price alerts, get research alerts and more. Get access now...
  • Add To MyStocks