28. Juni 2024 – Lupin v Commission

The Court of Justice examined the patent dispute settlement agreements between the Servier group and generic manufacturers. Servier, a pharmaceutical company that developed Perindopril, entered agreements with generics challenging its patent, wherein they would refrain from market entry and disputing the patent in exchange for payment.

The European Commission found these agreements to be anti-competitive and identified Servier's strategy as an abuse of dominant position, imposing fines exceeding €330 million on Servier and around €97 million on the generic manufacturers involved. These companies appealed to the General Court of the European Union (General Court).

The General Court partially upheld the European Commission's decision, confirming that agreements with Niche/Unichem, Matrix (now Mylan), Teva, and Lupin were anti-competitive. However, it overruled the European Commission’s findings on Servier’s abuse of dominant position and the agreements with Krka. Both Servier, its subsidiary Biogaran, the generic companies and the European Commission appealed against these rulings. Lupin, Niche Generics, Unichem Laboratories, Matrix, Teva, and Biogaran also filed an appeal.

The Court of Justice dismissed the appeals from Lupin, Niche Generics, Unichem Laboratories, Matrix, Teva, and Biogaran, thus confirming the anti-competitive nature of the agreements. The court partially set aside the General Court’s judgments regarding the abuse of dominant position, agreeing with the Commission that the General Court had incorrectly invalidated the market definition.

For two of the three agreements between Servier and Krka, the Court of Justice found legal errors by the General Court and dismissed the initial actions of Servier and Krka. The third agreement was sent back to the General Court for further review. Regarding the infringement related to the agreement with Lupin, the court reduced the fine from €37,102,100 to €34,745,100 due to a calculation error.

For more information, see the Judgments (full text) under the following links: C-176/19 P,
C-201/19 P, C-151/19 P, C-144/19 P, C-164/19 P, C-166/19 P, C-197/19 P, C-198/19 P and
C-207/19 P.