Commentary regarding the final award of the Arbitration Tribunal in the case of Eli Lilly and Company with the Government of Canada
Abstract
This essay comments and analyzes the decision rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal in the case of Eli Lilly and Company with the Government of Canada. The work centers on the debate that existed regarding the cancelation of two of Eli Lilly’s patents in Canada and whether the application of the doctrine of the promise of utility was a drastic change in the law in Canada, as well as analyzing the issues of legitimate expectations of a patent holder, harmonization of international patent law and whether Canada incurred in arbitrary and discriminatory actions by canceling the two patents.Keywords:
Patent cancelation action, utility, doctrine of the promise of utility, harmonization of international patent law, drastic change in the law, patents lawReferences
Billingsley, James (2015). «Eli Lilly and Company v The Government of Canada and the perils of investor-state arbitration». Journal University of Victoria, 20: 27-41. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2s1d0fO.
Cabanellas, Guillermo (2004). Derecho de las patentes de invención. 2.ª ed. Tomo I. Buenos Aires: Heliasta.
Gold, Richard y Michael Shortt (2014). «The promise of the patent in Canada and around the world». Canadian Intellectual Property Review, 30 (1): 35-81. Disponible en http://ssrn.com/abstract=2361146.
OMC, Organización Mundial del Comercio, Organización Mundial de Propiedad Intelectual y Organización Mundial de la Salud (2012). Promoting access to medicine innovation and technology: intersections between health, intellectual property and trade. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2tYzo5R.
Reichman, Jerome y Rochelle Dreyfuss (2007). «Harmonization without consensus: critical reflections on drafting a substantive patent law treaty». Duke Law Journal, 57 (1): 85-130. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2rM8flZ.
Vadi, Valentina (2016). «Towards a new dialectics: pharmaceutical patents, public health and foreign direct investments». Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, 5 (1): 113-195. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2sLsRvP.
Cabanellas, Guillermo (2004). Derecho de las patentes de invención. 2.ª ed. Tomo I. Buenos Aires: Heliasta.
Gold, Richard y Michael Shortt (2014). «The promise of the patent in Canada and around the world». Canadian Intellectual Property Review, 30 (1): 35-81. Disponible en http://ssrn.com/abstract=2361146.
OMC, Organización Mundial del Comercio, Organización Mundial de Propiedad Intelectual y Organización Mundial de la Salud (2012). Promoting access to medicine innovation and technology: intersections between health, intellectual property and trade. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2tYzo5R.
Reichman, Jerome y Rochelle Dreyfuss (2007). «Harmonization without consensus: critical reflections on drafting a substantive patent law treaty». Duke Law Journal, 57 (1): 85-130. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2rM8flZ.
Vadi, Valentina (2016). «Towards a new dialectics: pharmaceutical patents, public health and foreign direct investments». Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, 5 (1): 113-195. Disponible en http://bit.ly/2sLsRvP.
