This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21991179

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
India to rule on Novartis patent for cancer drug Glivec Novartis: India rejects patent plea for cancer drug Glivec
(about 5 hours later)
India's Supreme Court is due to rule on a patent case involving Swiss drug company Novartis, which campaigners say could threaten access in poorer countries to cheap generic drugs. India's Supreme Court has rejected a plea by Novartis to patent an updated version of its cancer drug, Glivec.
Novartis wants protection for an updated version of cancer drug Glivec. The Swiss drugmaker had been denied a patent by Indian authorities on the grounds that the new version was only slightly different from the old.
It is seeking to overturn a decision by Indian officials to refuse a patent on the grounds that the new version was only slightly different from the old. There were concerns that a patent could threaten access to cheap generic versions of drugs in poorer countries.
Medical charities say a Novartis win would set a "dangerous precedent". But some Western companies had warned that a decision against Novartis could discourage investment in research.
Glivec, which is used to treat chronic myeloid leukemia and other cancers, costs about $2,600 (£1,710) a month. Glivec, which is used to treat chronic myeloid leukaemia and other cancers, costs about $2,600 (£1,710) a month.
The generic equivalent is currently available in India for just $175.The generic equivalent is currently available in India for just $175.
'Price increases' Anand Grover, a lawyer representing Cancer Patients Aid Association, said he was "ecstatic with the ruling".
"This will go a long way in providing affordable medicine for the poor," he said.
Long battle
Novartis applied for a patent in 2006 for its new version of the drug, arguing that it was easier to absorb and therefore qualified for a fresh patent.Novartis applied for a patent in 2006 for its new version of the drug, arguing that it was easier to absorb and therefore qualified for a fresh patent.
The Indian patent authority rejected the application based on a law aimed at preventing companies from getting fresh patents by making only minor changes to existing drugs, a practice known as "evergreening". Officials also turned down an appeal by the company three years later. However, the Indian patent authority rejected the application based on a law aimed at preventing companies from getting fresh patents by making only minor changes to existing drugs, a practice known as "evergreening".
Western pharmaceutical companies say that if the Supreme Court rules against Novartis, it will discourage investment in research and in efforts to improve existing drugs. Officials also turned down a subsequent appeal by the company three years later.
"Knowing we can rely on patents in India benefits government, industry and patients because research-based organisations will know if investing in the development of better medicines for India is a viable long-term option," a Novartis statement said. On Monday, India's Supreme court rejected the firm's appeal to get patent protection for the drug.
But critics describe the updated version of Glivec as "an obvious, routine modification". The AFP news agency quoted the court as saying that the updated drug "did not satisfy the test of novelty or inventiveness" as required by the law.
"You could have drug companies claiming one new drug and then patenting it over and over again for routine improvements," said Medecins sans Frontieres lawyer Leena Menghaney.
"If generic competition on many crucial medicines ends, then prices for these medicines will increase, both in India and across the developing world," she added.
"This would be devastating for millions who rely on India for affordable medicines."