Insights & news

David Hull speaks at Europe's leading pharmaceutical law conference in Brussels

  • 18/05/2017
  • News

On May 16 2017, David Hull spoke at Europe's leading pharmaceutical law conference held in Brussels. David’s presentation focused on excessive pricing, discounts and rebates in the EU. 

Further information on the event is available here

Key contacts

Related practice areas

Related insights

Sign up for updates
    • 06/04/2020
    • Articles

    Dutch Competition Authority Accepts Roche Commitments Regarding Supply of Testing Materials for SARS-CoV-2 Test

    Autoriteit Consument en Markt, the Dutch competition authority (“ACM”), published on 3 April 2020 a press release expressing satisfaction with commitments made by Roche Diagnostics (“Roche”) regarding the supply of testing materials for the SARS-CoV-2 test (see, attachments). Roche, which ACM says has a “key position” for testing equipment and materials in The Netherlands, had been accused of withholding such materials, including lysis buffer solution, a reagent used to break open cells. On 26 March 2020, the Dutch second Parliamentary Chamber even voted a resolution which observed a shortage of that solution, attributed blame for the alleged shortage to Roche, and called on the government to compel Roche to share the recipe, if necessary by relying on a compulsory patent licence. Roche rejected the allegations and pointed out that it had not even claimed patent protection for the recipe. According to Roche, which pointed out that it developed the first SARS-CoV-2 test in record time, the issue had arisen because Roche could not guarantee the safety and reliability of test results if the reagents were produced in facilities not under its control. For its part, ACM made it clear that Roche had exhibited a “constructive attitude” by sharing the recipe for lysis buffer solution and helping in expanding production. This is why ACM did not consider further action necessary. In passing, ACM pointed out that it had worked closely with the European Commission as many Member States are grappling with similar problems.

    Read more
    • 31/03/2020
    • Articles

    Pharmaceuticals Remain Focus for Belgian Competition Authority in 2020

    The Belgian Competition Authority (“BCA”) has just published its annual policy note which sets out its enforcement priorities for the year (see, attachments). The pharmaceutical sector is once more one of the BCA’s principal targets for action and, as the BCA indicates, this is not different from an approach followed by other competition authorities around Europe. The BCA is known to be pursuing cases in the sector actively (see e.g., Van Bael & Bellis Life Sciences News alert of 8 October 2019). It also adopted several infringement decisions against a pharmacists’ association in 2019 (see e.g., Van Bael & Bellis Life Sciences News alerts of 5 June 2019, 24 June 2019 and 17 October 2019). Additionally, its chief prosecutor in competition matters had occasion to explain the BCA’s handling of the sector during a hearing of the federal Chamber of Representatives in October 2019 (https://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/55/0758/55K0758001.pdf). Apart from the pharmaceutical sector and in line with previous years, the BCA will target distribution, logistics, service providers and telecommunications and will continue to monitor procurement matters. Finally, it will also tackle the digital economy.

    Read more
    • 30/03/2020
    • Articles

    European Commission Offers Guidance on Foreign Direct Investment and Protection of Europe’s Healthcare Capacities

    On 25 March 2020, the European Commission (the Commission) published guidance to the Member States of the EU concerning the limitation of foreign direct investment (“FDI”) and free movement of capital from third countries in order to protect Europe’s strategic assets, especially its healthcare capacities (see, attachment). The Commission considers that, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, there could be “an increased risk of attempts from non-EU investors to acquire healthcare capacities (for example for the production of medical or protective equipment) or related industries such as research establishments (for instance developing vaccines) via foreign direct investment”. According to the Commission, if left unchecked, FDI could hamper the EU’s capacity to cover the health needs of its citizens. Since the responsibility for screening FDI lies with EU Member States, the Commission calls upon them to (i) make full use of their screening mechanisms “to take fully into account the risks to critical health infrastructures, supply of critical inputs, and other critical sectors”; and (ii) to set up a screening mechanism if they do not yet have one “and in the meantime to use all other available options”. EU Member States should thus avert FDI liable to “create a risk to security or public order in the EU, including a risk to critical health infrastructures and supply of critical inputs”. The Commission also refers to Regulation (EU) 2019/452 establishing a framework for the screening of FDI into the Union (FDI Screening Regulation), which will apply as of 11 October 2020. The FDI Screening Regulation lists critical health infrastructure among the factors which may be taken into consideration in determining whether FDI is likely to affect security or public order. The FDI Screening Regulation also sets up a cooperation mechanism between the Commission and Member States in order to tackle FDI that creates risks in several Member States. Finally, the Commission provides guidance on the possible justifications for restricting capital movements.

    Read more

Subscribe to our updates

Please select the practice areas you are interested in: *