The Glivec case: getting beyond efficacy


Jitesh Kumar

The Glivec case: getting beyond efficacy

The Indian Supreme Court has failed to provide the clarity which is craved by practitioners in its latest pronouncement on the controversial Section 3(d), says Jitesh Kumar.

The judgment of the Indian Supreme Court concerning Novartis’ anti-cancer drug Glivec has dominated all recent discussions on Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act. Despite being a landmark reference for issues pertaining to Section 3(d), it is often forgotten that there is much more to Section 3(d) beyond the “enhanced efficacy” requirement, which the judgment did not address.

While cogent in many aspects, the ruling has evaluated issues primarily in the context of specific facts and circumstances of the case, leaving us with dicta rather than binding precedence.

The scope of Section 3(d)

Indian Supreme Court, Glivec, section 3(d)