tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post6450237848631143721..comments2024-03-28T13:45:42.289+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Treating insomnia: Sheep don't count in Court of Justice's eyesVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-71929774116615657472012-07-20T10:49:14.089+01:002012-07-20T10:49:14.089+01:00I agree - surely the regulation needs to be amende...I agree - surely the regulation needs to be amended now, seeing as we have travelled so far from the literal meaning of Article 3. Black now equals white - night has turned into day.<br /><br />Also, I think that the esteemed court has made an error and should have referred to the second medicinal product at the start of paragraph 26, instead of referring to the first medicinal product.Tom Shillingfordnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-60000035281191215482012-07-19T15:10:15.677+01:002012-07-19T15:10:15.677+01:00Good news for Neurim, and it feels like justice wa...Good news for Neurim, and it feels like justice was done.<br /><br />However, in terms of legal certainty, this decision is not encouraging. The ECJ, following the advocate general, has gone against the express wording of the Regulation. To my common law eyes, this takes the prinicple of 'teleological construction' too far. The wording of the Regulation left no doubt here, but the court chose to ignore it.<br /><br />As I say, however, the overall result seems fair to Neurim, but he reasoning is flawed. An amendment to the Regulation is required so as to restore some certainty to field of SPCs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com