Kerala HC: Revisional Power U/S 263 Not Invocable When AO Grants Sec 32AC Deduction After Inquiry || J&K&L HC: Section 359 BNSS Doesn’t Limit High Court’s Inherent Power U/S 528 to Quash FIRs || Bombay HC: BMC Ban on Footpath Cooking via Gas/Grill Doesn’t Apply to Vendors Using Induction || Madras HC: Buyer Not Liable for Seller’s Tax Default; Purchase Tax Can’t Be Imposed under TNGST Act || Kerala HC: Oral Allegations Alone Insufficient to Sustain Bribery Charges Against Ministers || Delhi HC: CCI Cannot Levy Interest Retrospectively Before Valid Service of Demand Notice || Delhi HC: VC Rules Don’t Shield PMLA Accused From Physically Appearing Before ED in Probe || SC: If Complaint Reveals Cognizable Offence, Magistrate May Order FIR Registration U/S .156(3) CrPC || SC: Private Buses Can’t Operate on Inter-State Routes Overlapping Notified State Transport Routes || Delhi HC: Writ Petition Not Maintainable Against Provisional Attachment When PMLA Remedy Exists

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation & Anr. v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. - (High Court of Delhi) (07 Oct 2015)

Delhi High Court rules in favour of Merck for its diabetes drug

Intellectual Property Rights

The Delhi High Court restrained Glenmark from selling any drug containing Sitagliptin or its derivate. Sitagliptin is the active ingredient used in ‘Januvia’, Merck’s once-daily pill used to lower blood sugar levels in people with Type II diabetes. It had claimed that Glenmark had infringed its patent in the specific chemical. The court dismissed contentions that Glenmark’s product, ‘Zita’, was different from Merck’s product.

Relevant : Read the decision in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Tags : GLENMARK MERCK PATENT DIABETES

Share :