Multiple Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicinal Products: Towards a New Approach?

Abstract The granting of multiple Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for the same active ingredient has generated significant controversy in EU law. Regulation 469/2009 originally established a strict “one SPC per product per holder” rule to balance pharmaceutical innovation incentives against public access to medicines. However, CJEU case law has progressively liberalised this framework, permitting multiple SPCs under increasingly broad circumstances. This article critically analyses the proposal to amend Art. 3(c) of Regulation 469/2009 as part of the planned EU reform (“Pharmaceutical Package”), which would limit the possibility of granting multiple SPCs for the same medicinal product exclusively to economically unrelated entities. The proposed amendment aims to counteract the imbalance in the SPC system, which, due to evolving jurisprudence, allows multiple protection for the same product. The author examines the current interpretation of Art. 3(c) in light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and national courts, comparing it with the literal interpretation and related provisions of Art. 3(a), (b), and (d). The legislative amendment could help restore balance in the protection of pharmaceutical innovations; however, whilst necessary, it represents an incomplete solution. Further legislative action may be necessary, including codification of current jurisprudence or creating precise criteria and a test for Art. 3(c) to ensure consistency and predictability in the application of the law. The article proposes a four-element test for assessing multiple SPC applications that balances innovation incentives with the public interest.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
GRURRR. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht, Rechtsprechungs-Report/GRUR-DVD/GRUR-CD/IIC/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Internationaler Teil
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-025-01674-6
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multiple Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicinal Products: Towards a New Approach?

Agnieszka Sztoldman
GRURRR. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht, Rechtsprechungs-Report/GRUR-DVD/GRUR-CD/IIC/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Internationaler Teil
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Multiple Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicinal Products: Towards a New Approach?

Agnieszka Sztoldman
article en

Abstract

Abstract The granting of multiple Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for the same active ingredient has generated significant controversy in EU law. Regulation 469/2009 originally established a strict “one SPC per product per holder” rule to balance pharmaceutical innovation incentives against public access to medicines. However, CJEU case law has progressively liberalised this framework, permitting multiple SPCs under increasingly broad circumstances. This article critically analyses the proposal to amend Art. 3(c) of Regulation 469/2009 as part of the planned EU reform (“Pharmaceutical Package”), which would limit the possibility of granting multiple SPCs for the same medicinal product exclusively to economically unrelated entities. The proposed amendment aims to counteract the imbalance in the SPC system, which, due to evolving jurisprudence, allows multiple protection for the same product. The author examines the current interpretation of Art. 3(c) in light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and national courts, comparing it with the literal interpretation and related provisions of Art. 3(a), (b), and (d). The legislative amendment could help restore balance in the protection of pharmaceutical innovations; however, whilst necessary, it represents an incomplete solution. Further legislative action may be necessary, including codification of current jurisprudence or creating precise criteria and a test for Art. 3(c) to ensure consistency and predictability in the application of the law. The article proposes a four-element test for assessing multiple SPC applications that balances innovation incentives with the public interest.

GRURRR. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht, Rechtsprechungs-Report/GRUR-DVD/GRUR-CD/IIC/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Internationaler TeilVol. 57(1)
Institute of Law (CN)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.