Roche Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd

"Patent Protection vs. Public Interest: The Erlotinib Infringement Case"

Short Description :

Roche Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. sued Cipla Ltd. for patent infringement over Cipla's generic version of the cancer drug Erlotinib, marketed as Erlocip. The case involved complex issues of patent validity, infringement, and public interest.

Case Details :

Patent Dispute: Roche claimed that Cipla's Erlocip infringed on its patent for Tarceva, a medication used to treat non-small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.

Court Rulings :

- Initial Ruling : The Delhi High Court initially ruled in favor of Cipla, considering the public interest aspect and the significant price difference between Tarceva and Erlocip.

- Division Bench Ruling : However, the Division Bench later reversed this decision, finding that Cipla's product infringed Roche's patent and ordering Cipla to render accounts for profits earned from Erlocip's sales.

- Settlement : The parties ultimately settled the dispute, with Cipla withdrawing its Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed in the Supreme Court.

Key Takeaways :

- Patent Infringement Guidelines : The case established detailed guidelines for patent infringement suits in India.

- Public Interest : The court's consideration of public interest and access to affordable medication played a crucial role in the case's outcome.

- Patent Validity : The case highlighted the importance of patent validity and the need for patentees to demonstrate the novelty and inventiveness of their inventions.