Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-10-21-Speech-2-216"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031021.6.2-216"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Question No 46 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen ():
According to national legal practice in some Member States it is illegal to relabel parallel-imported pharmaceuticals so that they bear the name used by the trademark holder in the importing country, if the pharmaceutical concerned can be sold in the importing country under the same name as it was marketed under in the exporting country. This rule applies regardless of whether the parallel importer can show that, when the product is not renamed, the importer is deprived of 25% of the market owing to rules on the substitution of pharmaceuticals and doctors' prescription habits.
In the Commission's view, is it consistent with the provisions of the Treaty on the free movement of goods and with Court of Justice case law concerning parallel imports of pharmaceuticals for national courts to justify their ruling that the above practice is illegal on the grounds, for example, that the lack of access to the market is solely a commercial obstacle which importers must seek to overcome by means of (in principle unrestricted) marketing which targets prescribing doctors (despite the fact that parallel importers do not have access to Drug Master Files or equivalent scientific/technical data, and regardless of whether the price of the pharmaceutical is regulated by rules on the dispensing of medicines)?"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Subject: Relabelling of parallel-imported pharmaceuticals"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples