Glivec appeal to be heard by different bench

A bench of the Supreme Court bench has recused itself from hearing the Special Leave Petition filed by Novartis AG. Consequently, the petition is to be reassigned to another bench..Novartis have filed this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, advised by Mrs. Meenakshi Arora, Partner, Kachwaha & Partners. The Cancer Patient Aid Association, a Mumbai Based NGO is represented by Anand Grover of Lawyer’s Collective..A bench of the Supreme Court bench has recused itself from hearing the Special Leave Petition filed by Novartis AG. Consequently, the petition is to be reassigned to another bench. Novartis have filed this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, advised by Mrs. Meenakshi Arora, Partner, Kachwaha & Partners..The Cancer Patient Aid Association has been at the forefront of several such patent litigations, in an attempt to make generic drugs, which are cheaper, available to patients who cannot avail the expensive drugs. The Mumbai based NGO stands out amongst the respondents, primarily statutory bodies and pharma corporates. The Association is represented by Mr. Anand Grover of Lawyers Collective..The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) had, in June, denied a patent to Imatinib Mesylate, commercially known as Glivec, in its beta crystal form, by upholding objections under Section 3(d) of the Patent Act. Section 3(d) grants a patent only if a product proves to be more efficacious than existing drug molecules. Also, the IPAB, upholding objections under Section 3(b), held that the price of the drug was far too high, and against public welfare. Section 3(b) extrapolates that if the primary or intended use or commercial exploitation of a drug could be contrary to public order, or morality, or could cause serious prejudice to human, animal or plant life, such cannot be granted a patent..Litigations relating to Glivec started in 2003 with an exclusive marketing right obtained by Novartis. Later rejected by the Patent office, they appealed to the High Court at Chennai, who transferred the matter to the IPAB.