Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 246 views

    Roma Drug v. RTC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Carla Domingo
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9502 amended Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code to grant third parties the right to import drugs or medicines patented in the Philippines. This was confirmed by the implementing rules of RA 9502, which state that the right to import unregistered imported drugs is available to government agencies and private third parties. The Court held that petitioners thus had the right to import and possess drugs found in Roma Drug's store, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Roma Drug v. RTC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Carla Domingo
    246 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9502 amended Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code to grant third parties the right to import drugs or medicines patented in the Philippines. This was confirmed by the implementing rules of RA 9502, which state that the right to import unregistered imported drugs is available to government agencies and private third parties. The Court held that petitioners thus had the right to import and possess drugs found in Roma Drug's store, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9502 amended Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code to grant third parties the right to import drugs or medicines patented in the Philippines. This was confirmed by the implementing rules of RA 9502, which state that the right to import unregistered imported drugs is available to government agencies and private third parties. The Court held that petitioners thus had the right to import and possess drugs found in Roma Drug's store, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    246 views2 pages

    Roma Drug v. RTC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Carla Domingo
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9502 amended Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code to grant third parties the right to import drugs or medicines patented in the Philippines. This was confirmed by the implementing rules of RA 9502, which state that the right to import unregistered imported drugs is available to government agencies and private third parties. The Court held that petitioners thus had the right to import and possess drugs found in Roma Drug's store, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    149907 April 16, 2009


    ROMA DRUG and ROMEO RODRIGUEZ, as Proprietor of ROMA DRUG, Petitioners,
    vs.
    THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF GUAGUA, PAMPANGA, THE PROVINCIAL
    PROSECUTOR OF PAMPANGA, BUREAU OF FOOD & DRUGS (BFAD) and GLAXO
    SMITHKLINE, Respondents.
    Facts:
    On 14 August 2000, a team composed of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)
    operatives and inspectors of the Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD) conducted a raid on
    petitioner Roma Drug, a duly registered sole proprietorship of petitioner Romeo Rodriguez
    (Rodriguez) operating a drug store located at San Matias, Guagua, Pampanga. It appears
    that Roma Drug is one of six drug stores which were raided on or around the same time
    upon the request of SmithKline Beecham Research Limited (SmithKline), a duly registered
    corporation which is the local distributor of pharmaceutical products manufactured by its
    parent London-based corporation.
    The NBI subsequently filed a complaint against Rodriguez for violation of Section 4 (in
    relation to Sections 3 and 5) of Republic Act No. 8203, also known as the Special Law on
    Counterfeit Drugs (SLCD), with the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in San Fernando,
    Pampanga.

    Procedural Posture:
    During preliminary investigation, Rodriguez challenged the constitutionality of the SLCD.
    However, Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Celerina C. Pineda skirted the challenge and
    issued a Resolution dated 17 August 2001 recommending that Rodriguez be charged with
    violation of Section 4(a) of the SLCD.
    The recommendation was approved by Provincial Prosecutor Jesus Y. Manarang approved
    the recommendation. Hence, the present Petition for Prohibition requesting the RTC Guagua
    Pampanga and the Provincial Prosecutor to desist from further prosecuting Rodriguez, and
    that Sections 3(b)(3), 4 and 5 of the SLCD be declared unconstitutional.
    Through its Resolution dated 15 October 2001, the Court issued a temporary restraining
    order enjoining the RTC from proceeding with the trial against Rodriguez, and the BFAD, the
    NBI and Glaxo Smithkline from prosecuting the petitioners.

    Issue:
    Whether Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9502 amended Section 72 of the Intellectual Property
    Code

    Ruling:
    The Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative. Section 7 of Rep. Act No. 9502 amended
    Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code in that the later law unequivocally grants third
    persons the right to import drugs or medicines whose patents were registered in the
    Philippines by the owner of the product. The unqualified right of private third parties such as
    petitioner to import or possess “unregistered imported drugs” in the Philippines is further
    confirmed by the “Implementing Rules to Republic Act No. 9502” promulgated on 4
    November 2008.
    “Section 72 of Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of
    the Philippines, is hereby amended to read as follows:
    “Sec. 72. Limitations of Patent Rights. – The owner of a patent has no right to prevent third
    parties from performing, without his authorization, the acts referred to in Section 71 hereof in
    the following circumstances:
    “72.1. Using a patented product which has been put on the market in the Philippines by the
    owner of the product, or with his express consent, insofar as such use is performed after that
    product has been so put on the said market: Provided, That, with regard to drugs and
    medicines, the limitation on patent rights shall apply after a drug or medicine has been
    introduced in the Philippines or anywhere else in the world by the patent owner, or by any
    party authorized to use the invention: Provided, further, That the right to import the drugs
    and medicines contemplated in this section shall be available to any government agency or
    any private third party;
    72.2. Where the act is done privately and on a non-commercial scale or for a non-
    commercial purpose: Provided, That it does not significantly prejudice the economic interests
    of the owner of the patent;
    72.3. Where the act consists of making or using exclusively for experimental use of the
    invention for scientific purposes or educational purposes and such other activities directly
    related to such scientific or educational experimental use;
    72.4. In the case of drugs and medicines, where the act includes testing, using, making or
    selling the invention including any data related thereto, solely for purposes reasonably
    related to the development and submission of information and issuance of approvals by
    government regulatory agencies required under any law of the Philippines or of another
    country that regulates the manufacture, construction, use or sale of any product: Provided,
    That, in order to protect the data submitted by the original patent holder from unfair
    commercial use provided in Article 39.3 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
    Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), the Intellectual Property Office, in
    consultation with the appropriate government agencies, shall issue the appropriate rules and
    regulations necessary therein not later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the
    enactment of this law;
    72.5. Where the act consists of the preparation for individual cases, in a pharmacy or by a
    medical professional, of a medicine in accordance with a medical shall apply after a drug or
    medicine has been introduced in the Philippines or anywhere else in the world by the patent
    owner, or by any party authorized to use the invention: Provided, further, That the right to
    import the drugs and medicines contemplated in this section shall be available to any
    government agency or any private third party; xxx7″

    You might also like