We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
Accept
  • SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Drug News
    • Trending
    • Commercial Operations
    • GMPs
    • FDA Enforcement Actions
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • Research and Development
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • FDAnews Drug Weekly
    • FDAnews
  • Device News
    • Trending
    • Commercial Operations
    • FDA Enforcement Actions
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • Research and Development
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • FDAnews Device Weekly
    • FDAnews
  • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Drug Books
    • Device Books
  • Training/Events
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • Events
  • Resources
    • Form 483s Database
    • FDA Approved Drugs
    • White Papers
  • CenterWatch
  • About Us
    • The Company
    • FDAnews Editorial Board
    • Contact Us
  • Advertising
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » PERU CLAIMS PARTIAL VICTORY ON US FTA PATENT TERMS

PERU CLAIMS PARTIAL VICTORY ON US FTA PATENT TERMS

December 22, 2005

Peru's newly completed Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the US has been welcomed by independent observers, although the deal could place additional strain on the government's drug purchasing system. The new drug market regulations set out by the treaty -- which the US has also negotiated with the other Andean states excluding Venezuela -- are nevertheless a breakthrough for foreign firms.

A key US concern has been "national treatment" -- or the 20% bidding preference given to local companies on all government tenders worth more than US$175,000. The FTA will now equalise preferences for US companies, although firms based in other Andean states -- notably including fellow FTA partners Ecuador and Colombia -- will not enjoy the same privileges. Unsurprisingly, Peruvian manufacturers have vigorously opposed this reform.

Patentability was also an important aspect of US negotiating priorities. The FTA urges conformity with TRIPS as a minimum standard, but some measures go beyond basic international accords -- for example, biotech products will now be subject to an examination of their patent status prior to approval by health authorities. The introduction of five-year data exclusivity is also a major positive factor for research-based firms -- as is the right to seek non-punitive redress in all future patent infringement cases.

However, opponents of the FTA have outlined serious concerns regarding the treaty's IP terms, especially on the data exclusivity issue. Mainly due to the fact that Peru lacks a clear definition for New Chemical Entities (NCEs), it is feared that extendable data protection terms will eventually amount to a "parallel" patent system.

Nevertheless, Peru can claim to have protected some of its interests. The FTA includes a "Bolar exemption" for generics makers, and decisions on patent term restoration will rest with the government. Further, the FTA also upholds many of Peru's rules on compulsory licensing and parallel importation. So-called "second use" patents are also not recognised, and suggestions that key principles of US trademark law be adopted in Peru was rejected.

Meanwhile, the eventual impact of the treaty remains to be seen. There are concerns that prices could rise as state drug purchaser Essalud is obliged to buy more original drugs, although the health ministry has pledged to create a new fund to offset any extra costs brought by the strengthened IP regime.

KEYWORDS Daily International Pharma Alert

    Upcoming Events

    • 28Sep

      The Cost of Counterfeiting: Why You Need a Plan to Secure Your Medical Device Supply Chain

    • 28Sep

      Calculating Sample Size to Satisfy FDA Expectations

    • 11Oct

      GMP Quality Management vSummit 2023: Where Quality Meets Risk

    • 16Oct

      MAGI@home Clinical Research Conference 2023

    • 26Oct

      FDA in 2024: What to Expect in an Election Year

    • 08Nov

      18th Annual FDA Inspections vSummit

    Featured Products

    • FDA, FTC and DOJ Enforcement of Medical Device Regulations

      FDA, FTC and DOJ Enforcement of Medical Device Regulations

    • Using Real-World Evidence in Drug and Device Submissions

      Using Real-World Evidence in Drug and Device Submissions

    Featured Stories

    • Manufacturing Cost is Key Issue Facing Gene Therapy Products, Marks Says

    • Artificial Womb Technology Not Yet Ready for Human Trials Adcomm Says

    • Top Concern for CBER is Marketing of Unapproved Biologics, Says FDA Official

    • FDA Deems Medline Industries’ Saline Solution Vial Recall as Class 1

    The Revised ICH E8: A Guide to New Clinical Trial Requirements

    Learn More
    • Drug Products
      • Quality
      • Regulatory Affairs
      • GMPs
      • Inspections and Audits
      • Postmarket Safety
      • Submissions and Approvals
      • Research and Development
      • Commercial Operations
    • Device Products
      • Quality
      • Regulatory Affairs
      • QSR
      • Inspections and Audits
      • Postmarket Safety
      • Submissions and Approvals
      • Research and Development
      • Commercial Operations
    • Clinical Products
      • Trial Design
      • Data Integrity
      • GCP
      • Inspections and Audits
      • Transparency
    • Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell or Share My Data
    Footer Logo

    300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

    Phone 703.538.7600 – Toll free 888.838.5578

    Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing