欧洲法院的仿制药(英国)判决

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Journal of Antitrust Enforcement Pub Date : 2021-10-24 DOI:10.1093/jaenfo/jnab016
{"title":"欧洲法院的仿制药(英国)判决","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jaenfo/jnab016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>This issue’s <span style=\"font-style:italic;\">Contemporary Critique</span> discusses the ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in <span style=\"font-style:italic;\">Generics (UK) v Competition and Markets Authority</span>. Anticipated as it was, the judgment is something of a milestone in EU antitrust. For one, it marked the first foray by the EU’s apex court into the legal minefield of reverse patent settlements that have, over the past decade, sparked considerable debate in academic and policy-making spheres alike. For another, <span style=\"font-style:italic;\">Generics (UK)</span> is a quite sweeping judgment, addressing head-on several foundational concepts of EU competition law. It therefore has ramifications for EU antitrust enforcement beyond the specific issue at the heart of the case.</span>","PeriodicalId":42471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The European Court of Justice’s Generics (UK) judgment\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jaenfo/jnab016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span>This issue’s <span style=\\\"font-style:italic;\\\">Contemporary Critique</span> discusses the ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in <span style=\\\"font-style:italic;\\\">Generics (UK) v Competition and Markets Authority</span>. Anticipated as it was, the judgment is something of a milestone in EU antitrust. For one, it marked the first foray by the EU’s apex court into the legal minefield of reverse patent settlements that have, over the past decade, sparked considerable debate in academic and policy-making spheres alike. For another, <span style=\\\"font-style:italic;\\\">Generics (UK)</span> is a quite sweeping judgment, addressing head-on several foundational concepts of EU competition law. It therefore has ramifications for EU antitrust enforcement beyond the specific issue at the heart of the case.</span>\",\"PeriodicalId\":42471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnab016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnab016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本期《当代评论》讨论了欧洲法院(ECJ)在仿制药(英国)诉竞争和市场管理局一案中的裁决。正如人们所预料的那样,这一判决是欧盟反垄断史上的一个里程碑。首先,它标志着欧盟最高法院首次涉足专利反向和解的法律雷区。在过去10年里,这一领域在学术和决策领域都引发了相当大的争论。另一方面,仿制药(英国)是一个相当全面的判决,正面解决了欧盟竞争法的几个基本概念。因此,它对欧盟反垄断执法的影响超出了本案的核心具体问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The European Court of Justice’s Generics (UK) judgment
This issue’s Contemporary Critique discusses the ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Generics (UK) v Competition and Markets Authority. Anticipated as it was, the judgment is something of a milestone in EU antitrust. For one, it marked the first foray by the EU’s apex court into the legal minefield of reverse patent settlements that have, over the past decade, sparked considerable debate in academic and policy-making spheres alike. For another, Generics (UK) is a quite sweeping judgment, addressing head-on several foundational concepts of EU competition law. It therefore has ramifications for EU antitrust enforcement beyond the specific issue at the heart of the case.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The journal covers a wide range of enforcement related topics, including: public and private competition law enforcement, cooperation between competition agencies, the promotion of worldwide competition law enforcement, optimal design of enforcement policies, performance measurement, empirical analysis of enforcement policies, combination of functions in the competition agency mandate, and competition agency governance. Other topics include the role of the judiciary in competition enforcement, leniency, cartel prosecution, effective merger enforcement, competition enforcement and human rights, and the regulation of sectors.
期刊最新文献
Considerations of monopsony in merger analysis: The Penguin Random House case Competition policy and the consumer welfare standard The evolution of EU competition law and policy in the pharmaceutical sector: long-lasting impacts of a pandemic A new order for EU merger control in digital markets Fairness and contestability in the provision of software application stores services
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1