On 5 December 2018, the High Court rejected Concordia’s application to obtain full access to the information underpinning the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) application for a warrant for a dawn raid, over which the CMA had claimed public interest immunity (PII). The judge did, however, allow Concordia access to some information.
The next Future Pharma Forum will be on 27 September: Implications of Recent EU and UK Court Decisions in the Pharmaceutical Sector
Emily MacKenzie, Barrister at Brick Court Chambers, will join us to recap on how challenges to pharmaceutical decisions may be brought to the European and domestic courts. Emily will provide a summary of recent European Court and English Court decisions in the pharmaceutical area and we will explore the implications for pharmaceutical companies.
- How to bring challenges to the European Court
- The interplay of domestic proceedings
- Summary of recent European Court decisions, including:
- Shire on orphan market exclusivity and;
- Astellas on the role of the Concerned Member State
- Summary of recent English Court decisions, including Napp on the Article 10(3) hybrid-abridged procedure
- Changes in the Notice to Applicants regarding RDP, including the “reverse combination” principle
- The implications for pharmaceutical companies
Judgment was handed down on 21 May in the DePuy Pinnacle Metal on Metal Hip group litigation: Gee & Others v DePuy International Limited  EWHC 1208 (QB)
312 claimants in the group litigation brought claims against DePuy, alleging that the hip prostheses with which they had been implanted were defective for the purposes of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (the Act) and the Product Liability Directive 85/374/EC (the Directive). The judgement followed a trial at first instance of a common preliminary issue, namely “whether or not the defendant is liable to the claimant, subject to any development risk defence.” The preliminary issue encompassed questions of causation.