A hard lesson learnt: Commonwealth v Sanofi
In June this year, the first Full Federal Court decision on this issue was handed down following a ten-year damages battle between the Commonwealth and Sanofi relating to Apotex’s ‘delayed’ launch of generic clopidogrel following PI.
In Commonwealth of Australia v Sanofi FCAFC 97 (June 26, 2023), the court denied the Commonwealth’s application for AUS $355 million ($229.6 million) damages from Sanofi (supplier of Plavix), and made a costs order against the Commonwealth, which is expected to be in the order of tens of millions of dollars.
In order to obtain PI, the patentee must provide an ‘undertaking as to damages’ which applies to the world at large. It applies to the Commonwealth’s savings foregone, even when the Commonwealth is not a party to the patent proceedings. As the Commonwealth has learned the hard way, the devil’s in the detail.
The court rejected the Commonwealth’s claim relating to ‘delayed’ sales of generic clopidogrel, finding that it had not established that Apotex would have listed and launched in the absence of PI.
Already registered?
Login to your account
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk