Patent Invalidation Procedures in the WTO Member BRICS Countries: India Provides a Model Legislation
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2024-11-2-73-90
Abstract
Eighty percent of the world’s population lives in emerging markets, and a significant portion of this population is not receiving healthcare or at least is not receiving the healthcare they need. This is an issue experienced in all of the BRICS countries as well. The BRICS countries particularly need drugs for the treatment and management of infectious and communicable diseases. The affordability of healthcare is one of the key priorities of the BRICS countries. These goals may not necessarily be in line with the patent laws of the BRICS countries which are also members of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This article examines the patent invalidation procedures of the four WTO member BRICS countries, namely India, China, Brazil, and South Africa with the aim of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of their procedural safeguards and learning from their experiences. The presence of a functional patent opposition model is of utmost importance for the BRICS countries, since this allows for the invalidation or opposition of patents that have been granted in their respective jurisdictions. However, except for India, none of the other WTO member BRICS countries have developed a well-thought-out patent opposition model. This study argues that the BRICS group provides a viable forum for India to promote its distinguished patent invalidation model. In turn, the WTO member BRICS countries can learn from India’s pro-health patent opposition model and reform their national patent laws to align with their public health priorities. This is especially important in the context of the pandemic like COVID-19, for example.
About the Author
M. Zaheer Abbas
Queensland University of Technology
Australia
Australia
Muhammad Zaheer Abbas – Chief Investigator, Australian Centre for Health Law Research (ACHLR); Lecturer in Law, Queensland University of Technology.
2 George St., Brisbane, QLD 4001
References
1. Abbott F.M. et al. (eds.). Emerging Markets and the World Patent Order (2013). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783471256
2. Cassier M. & Correa M. (eds.). Health Innovation and Social Justice in Brazil (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76834-2
3. Chen J. et al. TRIPS-Plus and Access to Medicines in China, 34(2) Journal of Public Health Policy 229 (2013).
4. Cohen W.M. & Merrill S.A. (eds.). Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy (2003). https://doi.org/10.17226/10770
5. Companies and Intellectual Property Commission, Submission by South Africa: Exceptions and Limitations (2017).
6. da Fonseca E.M. The Politics of Pharmaceutical Policy Reform: A Study of Generic Drug Regulation in Brazil (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12565-7
7. de Paula E.M. & Moura D.P. The Challenges of Providing Affordable Healthcare in Emerging Markets – The Case of Brazil, 17(2) Journal of Management Policy and Practice 35 (2016).
8. Drahos P. et al. (eds.). Kritika: Essays on Intellectual Property (2015). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784712068
9. Dreyfuss R. & Rodríguez-Garavito C. (eds.). Balancing Wealth and Health (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199676743.001.0001
10. Gaudillière J.-P. & Hess V. (eds.). Ways of Regulating Drugs in the 19th and 20th Centuries (2012). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137291523
11. Greenleaf K. et al. Beyond Our Borders: Comparing the Opposition Proceedings of Europe, China, and the United States, 5(6) Landslide 36 (2013).
12. Harris J. Achieving Access: Professional Movements and the Politics of Health Universalism (2017). https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501714832
13. Löfgren H. & Williams O. (eds.). The New Political Economy of Pharmaceuticals: Production, Innovation and TRIPS in the Global South (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315854
14. Löfgren H. (ed.). The Politics of the Pharmaceutical Industry and Access to Medicines: World Pharmacy and India (2017). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315136103
15. Matthews D. Intellectual Property, Human Rights and Development: The Role of NGOs and Social Movements (2011). https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857931245
16. Ncube C.B. The Draft National Intellectual Property Policy Proposals for Improving South Africa’s Patent Registration System: A Review, 9(10) Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice 828 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpu158
17. Nunes R. Brazilian Patent Statute under Attack (Part IV) Proposal for Pre-grant Opposition Mechanism in Respect of Patent Applications, 005 Prevail 2 (2015).
18. Ragavan S. Patent and Trade Disparities in Developing Countries (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199840670.001.0001
19. Sellin J.A. Access to Medicines: The Interface Between Patents and Human Rights. Does One Size Fit All? (2014). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780685083
20. Shadlen K.C. The Political Contradictions of Incremental Innovation: Lessons from Pharmaceutical Patent Examination in Brazil, 39(2) Politics and Society 145 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329211402601
21. Sun H. Post-Grant Patent Invalidation in China and in the United States, Europe, and Japan: A Comparative Study, 15 Fordham Intellectual Property Media and Entertainment Law Journal 286 (2004).
22. Sundaram J. Pharmaceutical Patent Protection and World Trade Law: The Unresolved Problem of Access to Medicines (2018). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315267692
23. Tannoury M. & Attieh Z. The Influence of Emerging Markets on the Pharmaceutical Industry, 86 Current Therapeutic Research 19 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.curtheres.2017.04.005
24. Tomlinson C. et al. Reforming South Africa’s Procedures for Granting Patents to Improve Medicine Access, 105(9) South African Medical Journal 741 (2015). https://doi.org/10.7196/samjnew.8270
25. Weatherall K. et al. Patent Oppositions in Australia: The Facts, 34(1) University of New South Wales Law Journal 93 (2011).
26. Yu P.K. Access to Medicines, BRICS Alliances, and Collective Action, 34 American Journal of Law and Medicine 348 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1177/009885880803400210
27. Zaheer Abbas М. & Riaz S. TRIPS Flexibilities: Implementation Gaps Between Theory and Practice, 2013(1) Nordic Journal of Commercial Law 1 (2013).
28. Zaheer Abbas М. Patent Laws and the Public Health Puzzle: Comparing India’s Patent Opposition Model with the US and EU Model, 13 Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.61238/ijipl.2023v1301
Review
For citations:
Zaheer Abbas M. Patent Invalidation Procedures in the WTO Member BRICS Countries: India Provides a Model Legislation. BRICS Law Journal. 2024;11(2):73-90. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2024-11-2-73-90
Views:
413
Email this article 