This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013CB0210
Case C-210/13: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — United Kingdom) — Glaxosmithkline Biologicals SA, Glaxosmithkline Biologicals, Niederlassung der Smithkline Beecham Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Medicinal products for human use — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Concepts of ‘active ingredient’ and ‘combination of active ingredients’ — Adjuvant)
Case C-210/13: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — United Kingdom) — Glaxosmithkline Biologicals SA, Glaxosmithkline Biologicals, Niederlassung der Smithkline Beecham Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Medicinal products for human use — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Concepts of ‘active ingredient’ and ‘combination of active ingredients’ — Adjuvant)
Case C-210/13: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — United Kingdom) — Glaxosmithkline Biologicals SA, Glaxosmithkline Biologicals, Niederlassung der Smithkline Beecham Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Medicinal products for human use — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Concepts of ‘active ingredient’ and ‘combination of active ingredients’ — Adjuvant)
OJ C 102, 7.4.2014, p. 10–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 14/11/2013
- Date lodged:
- 18/04/2013
- Author:
- Court of Justice
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- English
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
7.4.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 102/10 |
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — United Kingdom) — Glaxosmithkline Biologicals SA, Glaxosmithkline Biologicals, Niederlassung der Smithkline Beecham Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks
(Case C-210/13) (1)
((Medicinal products for human use - Supplementary protection certificate - Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 - Concepts of ‘active ingredient’ and ‘combination of active ingredients’ - Adjuvant))
2014/C 102/13
Language of the case: English
Referring court
High Court of Justice (Chancery Division)
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Glaxosmithkline Biologicals SA, Glaxosmithkline Biologicals, Niederlassung der Smithkline Beecham Pharma GmbH & Co. KG
Defendants: Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks
Re:
Request for a preliminary ruling — High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — Interpretation of Article 1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1) — Concept of ‘active ingredient’ and ‘combination of active ingredients’ — Adjuvant which does not have a therapeutic effect of its own but enhances the therapeutic effect in an antigen.
Operative part of the order
Article 1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products must be interpreted as meaning that, just as an adjuvant does not fall within the definition of ‘active ingredient’ within the meaning of that provision, so a combination of two substances, namely an active ingredient having therapeutic effects on its own, and an adjuvant which, while enhancing those therapeutic effects, has no therapeutic effect on its own, does not fall within the definition of ‘combination of active ingredients’ within the meaning of that provision.
