Ru

copyright

Серверная ошибка, обратитесь к техническому специалисту

24 May 2022

Zuykov and partners succeeded in dismissing the claims for the transfer of the registration certificate for the drug Bezornil

The Arbitration Court of Moscow for the benefit of the pharmaceutical company Mayinglong (China), represented by the company Zuykov and partners, completed an almost two-year dispute on the transfer of rights to the medicinal product Bezornil under registration certificate №P №012011/01-260911 from 26.09.2011.


Thus, the Mayinglong Company, a large pharmaceutical enterprise, has been the holder (owner) of the registration certificate for a drug under the Bezornil trade name for more than 20 years, which refers to medicines of Chinese traditional medicine and is known in China under the trade name Shexiang Zhichuang Gao. The Mayinglong Company manufactures and supplies this medicinal product to Russia.


PharmComm LLC submitted a claim to the Moscow Arbitration Court against the Mayinglong Company demanding that the defendant transfer the right to a registration certificate for this medicinal product to the plaintiff.


The plaintiff's claims were based on the fact that PharmComm LLC is the owner of a series of trademarks united by the verbal element Bezornil, which is used on the packaging of the medicinal product without the permission of the copyright holder since the previous trademark owner is businessman Valentinov B.G. terminated the license agreement with Mayinglong unilaterally. In addition, in support of its claims, PharmComm LLC referred to the fact that it was the legal holder of the registration certificate since through a chain of contracts it had acquired the right to the results of clinical and preclinical trials that formed the basis of the registration dossier. The plaintiff also referred to the fact that in Russia there is no person responsible for the quality, efficacy, and safety of the medicinal product (performing the functions of pharmacovigilance ), which, in the opinion of PharmComm LLC, currently leads to the impossibility of supplying the medicinal product to the Russian Federation and jeopardizes the reputation of a natural medicinal product that has developed among the Russian consumer.


The Mayinglong Company, whose interests were represented by lawyers Zuykov and partners, did not agree with the stated requirements and disputed all the arguments voiced in the lawsuit, confirming their objections with relevant evidence.


The Court of First Instance took into account the position expressed by the representatives of the Mayinglong company, rejecting the plaintiff's arguments.


Thus, rejecting the plaintiff's arguments about the violation of the exclusive right to trademarks, the court indicated that their use of the disputed medicinal product in Russia is carried out by Rinpharm LLC, with which PharmComm LLC has a valid license agreement. Moreover, at present, the name of the medicinal product has been changed to BEZOPROKT, which is a trademark owned by Rinpharm LLC. The same company, based on a power of attorney issued by Mayinglong, performs the mandatory functions of pharmacovigilance.


At the same time, the court found unfounded the plaintiff's arguments that based on a chain of contracts concluded with DAO-PHARM LLC, DAO-PHARM 2009 LLC, and Valentinov B.G., the rights to the results of clinical and preclinical trials were transferred to him because these persons carried out the actions to conduct the relevant tests on behalf of Mayinglong based on issued powers of attorney.


The court also took into account the fact that since 2000, these persons did not make any claims about ownership of the right to a registration certificate, as well as claims for payment of research costs, to the defendant, thereby agreeing that the developer of the controversial drug and the proper holder registration certificate is the company Mayinglong.


Thus, Zuykov and partners was able to defend the client's right to the registration certificate for the medicinal product belonging to him.


The first instance court decision

Share on social media:
Back to news list