Can a World Trade Organization (WTO) Member exclude an invention from patentability on the grounds of ordre public or morality whilst at the same time permitting the sale and distribution of the invention within its territory? This is a question raised by recent developments in Europe, where moral restrictions have been placed on the patentability of ‘uses of human embryos’, yet human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, which involves the destruction of human embryos, is permitted and encouraged within numerous EU Member States, and indeed, also funded through the central EU science budget. This chapter assesses whether such an incoherent regulatory landscape would survive WTO scrutiny. The chapter argues that in general, if a WTO Member has not attempted to ban the commercial exploitation of a certain invention within its borders, measures prohibiting the patenting of that invention on moral grounds would likely be viewed as constituting an unjustified restriction on international trade. More concretely, it is suggested that the WTO Member would be found to be in violation of its obligation under the TRIPS Agreement to make patents available without ‘discrimination’ as to the field of technology.
|Name||Edinburgh Law School Working Papers|
- TRIPS Agreement
- moral exception
- human embryo
- international trade