Abstract / Description of output
The Indian Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in its decision in Bayer v. India (2013) held that ‘working’ of a patented invention is not necessarily restricted to local manufacturing within India and that in certain cases importation may constitute ‘working’. This article contends that IPAB conflated the ‘legitimate reasons’ defence for failure to work with the question of whether importation can satisfy local working requirements.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 278-284 |
| Journal | European Intellectual Property Review |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| Publication status | Published - 30 Apr 2015 |