Insights & news

Novartis Settles Bribery Charges under Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in Relation to Medicine-Related Conduct in Greece

  • 26/06/2020
  • News

Novartis AG, its subsidiary Novartis Hellas S.A.C.I., and its former subsidiary Alcon Pte Ltd (together Novartis) have agreed to pay total fines in excess of US $ 345 million to settle cases started by the US Department of Justice (the DOJ) and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) (see, attached press releases of 25 June 2020). A significant part of the practices alleged to be in violation of the FCPA took place in Greece.
Novartis was under investigation because it had made illicit payments to employees of state-owned or state-controlled health institutions in Greece and had also mischaracterised and falsely recorded these payments in its company books and accounts. For the US agencies, these payments amounted to bribery and their false characterisation as an attempt to cover up a crime.
The case serves as a reminder that conduct in Europe engaged in by a European firm and possibly in violation of European pharmaceutical and anti-bribery rules may also give rise to extensive exposure under US anti-corruption laws.
Novartis admitted that, between 2012 and 2015, it bribed healthcare professionals in Greece in an attempt to increase the sale of Novartis-branded pharmaceutical products.  Specifically, Novartis allowed healthcare professionals to travel overseas to medical congresses, including events held in the United States, in exchange for an assurance that these healthcare professionals would augment the number of prescriptions for Lucentis, a prescription-only ophthalmological medicine.  
Novartis also admitted that, between 2009 and 2010, it made improper payments to healthcare professionals in connection with an epidemiological study that was intended to increase sales of Novartis-branded prescription medicines. Novartis staff recognised that many participating healthcare professionals understood that they were being paid in exchange for writing prescriptions of Novartis products and not for supplying data as part of a clinical study.

Novartis not only agreed to pay sizeable fines, it also committed to cooperate with the US government in pending or future connected criminal investigations. Additionally, Novartis promised to enhance its compliance programmes, report on the implementation of enhanced compliance programmes, and take other remediation steps.


Key contacts

Related practice areas

Related insights

Sign up for updates
    • 21/09/2020
    • Articles

    Entry into Force of Second Agreement for Supply of COVID-19 Vaccine between European Commission and Sanofi-GSK

    As part of its European Vaccines Strategy adopted in June 2020 (see, Van Bael & Bellis Life Sciences News Alert of 18 June 2020), the European Commission (the Commission) announced on 18 September 2020 the entry into force of a second agreement providing for access to a potential vaccine against Covid-19 (see, attached press release). The Commission’s partner for the new agreement is Sanofi-GSK which has promised to sell up to 300 million doses of the new vaccine if the product materialises. The agreement would seem to emulate a similar deal with AstraZeneca in that the Commission secures the supply of vaccines for EU Member States and for a range of lower and middle income countries while financing part of the vaccine’s upfront development costs (see, Van Bael & Bellis Life Sciences News Alert of 31 August 2020). The vaccine now forms the subject of clinical trials and may become available in the second half of 2021 if it completes successfully its regulatory trajectory. Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline are developing a recombinant vaccine against Covid-19 that builds on Sanofi’s S-protein Covid-19 antigen, based on recombinant DNA technology, and GSK’s adjuvant technology. The combined approach is hoped to enhance the immune response and facilitate the production of vaccines on a large scale.

    Read more
    • 15/09/2020
    • Articles

    US President Signs Another Executive Order Implementing International Pricing Index Model

    On 13 September 2020, the US President signed another executive order (the New Order) implementing an international pricing index model (see, attachment). At the same time, he revoked an earlier such order signed at the end of July 2020 (see, Van Bael & Bellis Life Sciences News Alert of 28 July 2020). The New Order is more a political manifesto than a set of technical rules. It once more bemoans the allegedly unfair price differences for many prescription medicines between the US and other developed nations and posits that US citizens are thus “subsidizing innovation and lower-cost drugs for the rest of the world”. Additionally, the New Order expresses concern about access to medicines in that “high drug prices in the United States also have serious economic and health consequences for patients in need of treatment”. The New Order seeks to remedy these problems in similar fashion to what the July order tried to achieve and dictates that the price of qualifying medicines should not exceed that of the most-favoured nation price (MFNP) for these medicines. The MFNP is defined as the “lowest price, after adjusting for volume and differences in national gross domestic product, for a pharmaceutical product that the drug manufacturer sells in a member country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that has a comparable per-capita gross domestic product.” On that basis, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is directed to develop and test a payment model which implements the MFNP for two categories of medicines. Critics were quick to point out that the elaboration of a payment model does nothing more than signaling the start of a potentially lengthy administrative process. Still, developed nations are again at the receiving end of a strong message that prices for medicines in overseas markets that were developed in the US are likely to go up rather than down, regardless of their actual development costs.

    Read more
    • 10/09/2020
    • Articles

    Court of Justice of European Union Is Asked to Rule on Rebranding of Parallel Imported Generic Medicines as Branded Medicines

    Attached is a note discussing two Belgian references for a preliminary ruling seeking clarification from the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding the rebranding of parallel imported generic medicines with the name of the originator reference product. A judgment is due in 2021.

    Read more

Subscribe to our updates

Please select the practice areas you are interested in: *