LSE - Small Logo
LSE - Small Logo

Eduardo Mercadante

May 14th, 2021

Brazilian Supreme Court abolishes patent term extension

0 comments | 6 shares

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Eduardo Mercadante

May 14th, 2021

Brazilian Supreme Court abolishes patent term extension

0 comments | 6 shares

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

The Brazilian Supreme Court has ruled that the mechanism of patent term extension is unconstitutional, citing a paper co-written by PhD student in the Department of International Development, Eduardo Mercadante. Today marks the 25th anniversary of the patent law being modified.

Exactly 25 years ago to this date, the Industrial Property Law (nº 9,279) was promulgated in Brazil, introducing a mechanism of patent term extension without parallel in the world. In every country that belongs to the World Trade Organisation, patents that are granted will be valid for 20 years from filing. In Brazil, a special mechanism of compensation for the Patent Office’s delay in examining the patent applications extended their term by guaranteeing they would be valid for at least 10 years from grant. This means that if it takes the Office more than 10 years to grant patents, the total term will be longer than 20 years. Designed as an exception, it became the rule, which led to its constitutionality being questioned before the Supreme Court.

The Master’s dissertation and other papers written by the PhD Candidate in the Department of International Development, Eduardo Mercadante, directly contributed to the Brazilian Supreme Court’s ruling that this disposition is unconstitutional. The pharmaceutical industry was a key element in this discussion, especially given the dimension of the crisis in Brazil generated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Mercadante’s dissertation showed that the Brazilian Patent Office takes, on average, 13 years to grant pharmaceutical patents. Moreover, it found that 92.2% of its patents were granted with three and a half years of extension, on average.

The Brazilian extension clause was deemed unconstitutional because it was automatic, limitless, and could be triggered by the applicant, which makes it the strongest extension clause of any country in the world. The Court ruled that the competition and society, as consumers, could not be punished by the administration’s fault in having a slow prosecution. The justices explicitly denounced evergreening strategies, pipeline patents and even marketing strategies to shape the public opinion about the trial with ad terrorem arguments.

Another important element was the Court’s strong criticism of the Brazilian Patent Office’s examination capacity, especially in relation to the low number of examiners to deal with the impressive backlog: 459 pending applications per examiner. Many studies showed that revoking this clause would impact government spending in billions of dollars and reduce the hurdles faced by the generic industry. One study from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, co-written by Mercadante, was cited many times in the trial. The study estimated that ending the extension on just nine drugs could reduce the government’s spending in almost USD 1 billion (56%) in the respective extension periods. These savings represent 1.1% of the Unified Health System’s budget per year.

As a result of the decision, all pharmaceutical patents that were granted with an extension will lose the additional time, and no other pharmaceutical patent can be granted with an extension. It is estimated that something around 3,500 pharmaceutical patents will have their term reduced to the standard 20 years from grant. This decision may have an unprecedented impact in access to drugs, since it will reduce the exclusivity period for over 60 drugs, allowing for generics to be launched years in advance. As shown in Mercadante’s paper, generics can reach a 99% reduction on the price of the branded drug. Therefore, the Brazilian Supreme Court ruling will have a historic impact in strengthening a developing country’s capacity to deal with public health issues.

Although pharmaceuticals were at the centre of the discussion, the decision has general effects. For all other technological sectors, no other patent will be granted with more than 20 years of term but without retroactive effects. This means that the roughly 27,500 patents granted with extension in other sectors will keep it. However, this extra period should not be significant for many industries due to reduced product life cycle.

Eduardo Mercadante was interviewed by STAT on this decision. Here is a link to the paper (in Portuguese) and another article (in Portuguese) submitted to the Supreme Court, and a previous discussion of these issues on the ID Blog.

 


The views expressed in this post are those of the author and in no way reflect those of the International Development LSE blog or the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

About the author

Eduardo Mercadante

Eduardo Mercadante has an MRes in International Development from LSE and is currently a PhD student in the Department. He is a research assistant to Prof. Kenneth Shadlen in ID and a voluntary collaborator to the Economics of Innovation Research Group (IE/UFRJ).

Posted In: Covid-19 | Featured | Topical and Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

RSS Justice and Security Research Programme

  • JSRP and the future
    The JSRP drew to a close in 2017 but many of the researchers and partners involved in the programme continue to work on the issues and theories developed during the lifetime of the programme. Tim Allen now directs the Firoz Lalji Centre for Africa (FLCA) at LSE where many of the JSRP research team working […]
  • Life after the LRA
    The JSRP reached the end of its grant in spring 2017 but several outputs from the programme are scheduled for publication in the coming months. The most recent of these is a new journal article from Holly Porter and Letha Victor drawing on their extensive research with JSRP in the Acholi region of northern Uganda.  The […]

RSS LSE’s engagement with South Asia

  • Bhutan and the Border Crisis with China
    Amid rising tensions in the Himalayas, the kingdom of Bhutan is being drawn into an asymmetric border crisis with China, with implications for all South Asia. In the disputed Doklam and Pasamlung regions, China’s presence is now visible within Bhutanese territory, and Beijing has upped the ante further recently, claiming Sakteng near the border with […]
  • Bangladesh: Film Censorship in Film Magazines
    Film magazines offer a unique lens to appreciate a culture of expression pertaining to film censorship concerns in Bangladesh. In this post, Arpana Awwal traces some of the censorship debates in archived film magazines Chitrali and Purbani between 1981–1991.      Regardless of the fact that files of censored films remain restricted to public access […]