The Kerala High Court interpreted Section 100 of the Patents Act in a government use case involving the drug Ribociclib, balancing access to medicine with patent rights. The decision underscores tensions between public health policy, drug pricing, and patent enforcement.
Kerala HC on Section 100: Govt Use of Ribociclib Patent
The Kerala High Court recently ruled on the applicability of Section 100 of the Patents Act, which permits government use of patented inventions for public purposes, in the context of the cancer drug Ribociclib. The court examined whether the state could invoke this provision to enhance access to the life-saving medication amid ongoing patent enforcement and evolving drug pricing regulations.
The judgment emphasized that Section 100 allows the government to authorise use of a patented invention without the consent of the patentee, particularly in emergencies affecting public health. The court noted that while patent rights are protected under the law, they are not absolute, and public interest in access to essential medicines may necessitate intervention. The ruling referenced pending litigations involving other Ribociclib patents, highlighting the complexity of balancing innovation incentives with affordability.
"The real blockbuster is not cinema but the potential for equitable access,"
observed the court, using cinematic metaphor to underscore urgency. For practitioners, this decision signals increased judicial willingness to interpret patent exceptions in favour of public health policy. It also cautions patent holders that pricing strategies and regulatory compliance may influence the viability of enforcement actions, particularly in sectors involving high-cost therapeutics.
Citations
- Esteve Pharmaceuticals S.A. v. Controller of Patents and Designs (2026)
- Section 100, Patents Act, 1970
