US, EU, India and South Africa reach COVID waiver ‘compromise’
16-03-2022
MSF urges South Africa to open access to COVID-19 generics
10-02-2022
FotoHelin / Shutterstock.com
South Africa’s Supreme Court has declared regulations on complementary medicines invalid, explain Kareema Shaik and Jenny Pienaar of Adams & Adams.
In August 2017, South Africa’s Minister of Health, Aaron Motsoaledi, issued updated General Regulations (“the Regulations”) in terms of the Medicines and Related Substances Act 101 of 1965.
This introduced the category of “complementary medicines”, the definition of which included, inter alia, aromatherapy and homeopathy products and, under the sub-category of health supplements, vitamins, minerals and probiotics.
The regulations stipulated a number of requirements that complementary medicines would have to comply with, including labelling and advertising requirements. Given the wording of the regulations, producers of complementary medicines were also advised to obtain a licence from the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) to manufacture such products on the basis that complementary medicines qualify as, and fall within, the definition of a “medicine” as defined in the act.
To continue reading this article and to access our full archive, digital magazines and special reports you will need a subscription.
Start a subscription today to access the LSIPR website
If you have already subscribed please login.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription we can add you into, please email Atif at achoudhury@newtonmedia.co.uk
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
For access to the complete website and archive choose '12 MONTH SUBSCRIPTION'. For a free, two-week trial select ‘TWO WEEK FREE TRIAL’.
Adams & Adams, homeotherapy, Supreme Court of Appeal, labelling, advertising, complementary medicine, SAHPRA
