Author name: Praharsh Gour

Praharsh Gour is an Editor and Researcher at SpicyIP, where he writes on developments in intellectual property law, innovation policy, and international trade. His work focuses on the intersection of IP and international trade, particularly the realpolitik implications of global IP enforcement for the Global South, including questions of access, regulatory governance, and institutional reform. He holds a B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Hidayatullah National Law University and a Master’s degree from South Asian University. Prior to joining SpicyIP, he worked as a Senior Research Fellow at the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, where he assisted in matters concerning countervailing duties, antidumping, and safeguard investigations.

Leaked Draft of IP Chapter of India UK FTA Shows Ridiculous TRIPS plus norms in Negotiating Text

/ By / Copyright, Drug Regulation, Patent, Trade Secret, Trademark

India’s negotiations for a new Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the UK has been the talk of the town for a better part of 2022. From the widely popularized Diwali deadline, agreed by Prime Minister (s) Modi and Johnson, to the controversial comments by the UK Home Secretary Braverman on Indians overstaying their visas, the FTA negotiations have constantly been in the news. However, in the surrounding talk of progress and supposed benefits of the FTA, coverage of contentious issues

Leaked Draft of IP Chapter of India UK FTA Shows Ridiculous TRIPS plus norms in Negotiating Text Read More »

Despite Expert’s Submissions No Clarity on Section 52(1)(za) of Copyright Act, as Parties Settle!

/ By / Copyright, Others

In May, 2022, we reported that the Delhi High Court appointed Prof. Arul Scaria, under Rule 31 of the IP Division Rules 2022, as an expert in a copyright dispute, for assistance in interpreting the nuances of Section 52(1)(za) of Copyright Act. Now after almost five months since the appointment, the Court has passed an order (pdf) stating that the parties to the dispute have settled the matter out of court. (Note: I couldn’t find a record of the terms

Despite Expert’s Submissions No Clarity on Section 52(1)(za) of Copyright Act, as Parties Settle! Read More »

Image of a box of KRYXANA Ribociclib 200 mg film-coated tablets, marked “For sale in India only.”

State’s Inaction, Petitioner’s Death Makes Kerala High Court to Take Suo Moto Cognizance of Ribociclib’s Unaffordability

/ By / Others, Patent

Recently, the Kerala High Court took suo moto cognizance of a drug’s unaffordability, following the unfortunate passing away of the petitioner who had earlier made a pleading for the government to use the Patent Act levers to curb the rising prices of a life-saving drug (pdf). The drug in question here is Ribociclib, which is available under the brand name(s) Kisqali (in the USA) and Kryxana (in India) and is used to treat certain kinds of breast cancer. The Court

State’s Inaction, Petitioner’s Death Makes Kerala High Court to Take Suo Moto Cognizance of Ribociclib’s Unaffordability Read More »

Fixing Pre grants: Will the EAC suggestion to fix time limit help?

/ By / Others, Patent

Recently, the Economic Times reported that the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC) suggested two ways to fast track the process of granting patents. First, it suggested hiring more examiners, an issue we have previously raised alarm about here and here. However, it’s the second suggestion, to limit the timeline for filing pre-grant opposition to 6 months, which has been making quite a few rounds in the media  (see for instance here and here). These suggestions were apparently

Fixing Pre grants: Will the EAC suggestion to fix time limit help? Read More »

A meme about UNO where in one picture the card says "Come up with a robust and prompt solution to the IP challenges during the Pandemic or draw 25" and in next picture the player is holding 25 cards.

WTO Decides on the Access to COVID-19 Vaccines: Is Late as Good as Never? 

/ By / COVID-19, Patent

[This post has been co-authored by Rahul Bajaj and Praharsh Gour. Rahul is an attorney at IRA Law and a former Senior Resident Fellow at Vidhi. Rahul is a Rhodes Scholar (2018) and has worked as a law clerk for Justice D. Y Chandrachud (2020-21). He has also blogged for us in the past and was the SpicyIP Fellow for 2016. Readers can access posts by Rahul here. Views expressed in the post are personal] Since the TRIPS waiver was

WTO Decides on the Access to COVID-19 Vaccines: Is Late as Good as Never?  Read More »

Breaking: 12th WTO Ministerial Conference concludes with a Draft Decision on TRIPS (waiver?)

/ By / COVID-19, Patent

After 2 long years and the whole hubbub that the 12th Ministerial Conference was, (see here here and here) WTO has finally come up with the Draft Ministerial Decision On The TRIPS Agreement. The text is bound to have the world split on what to make of it. While multiple detailed assessments of this Draft Decision are due in course, I’ll quickly highlight a few key pointers which stand out (for better or worse)  Footnote 1: Defines ‘eligible Members’ to

Breaking: 12th WTO Ministerial Conference concludes with a Draft Decision on TRIPS (waiver?) Read More »

Delhi High Court Appoints an Academic Expert to Aid the Court in Interpreting Section 52(1)(za) of Copyright Act

/ By / Copyright

Some ten years ago, post Prof. Basheer’s intervention before the Supreme Court in the Novartis case, Prashant had commented “Academics in India are usually cloistered in their classrooms and conference rooms. I hope we have several more of such interventions, especially since we now have a breed of brilliant young academics in India”. And now almost a decade later, the Indian judiciary will be assisted by another academic in an IP dispute, this time in form of  Prof. Arul George

Delhi High Court Appoints an Academic Expert to Aid the Court in Interpreting Section 52(1)(za) of Copyright Act Read More »

Delhi High Court grants interim injunction to Novartis against Natco’s use of Revolade patent 

/ By / Patent

The Delhi High Court recently granted an interlocutory injunction to Novartis against Natco’s use of Eltrombopag Olamine (EO). The debate at the crux of the dispute is, or rather was, the dichotomy between deference to the validity of a granted patent vis-a-vis the challenge to its validity and consequently disregarding the exclusivity granted to it, in litigation. The court in the present matter seemed to have sided with the former and placed the ‘presumption’ of validity of a patent at

Delhi High Court grants interim injunction to Novartis against Natco’s use of Revolade patent  Read More »

Delhi High Court extends the deadline to submit comments on Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2021

/ By / Others

The Delhi High Court Registry on October 26, 2021 announced an extension for submitting suggestions and comments on the proposed Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2021. As per this, the new deadline stands as November 10, 2021.  The proposed rules come out as a result of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, and the recommendations made by the committee constituted by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court Justice D. N Patel, to further the implementation of

Delhi High Court extends the deadline to submit comments on Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2021 Read More »

Division Bench Stays the Interim Injunction Granted to Kibow Biotech, calls Methodology of the Single Judge Bench for Establishing Prima Facie case “Flawed”

/ By / Patent

The present post discusses another instance of interim injunctions imposed by our courts on the basis of problematic rationale. Sometime back, I reported on an interim injunction order by a Single Judge Bench of Madras High Court against La Renon Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. and Stanford Labs Pvt. Ltd (the defendants). Without narrating the background in detail again, the order was passed in an ongoing patent infringement dispute (covered here and here for the blog) surrounding Plaintiff no. 2’s (Kibow Biotech)

Division Bench Stays the Interim Injunction Granted to Kibow Biotech, calls Methodology of the Single Judge Bench for Establishing Prima Facie case “Flawed” Read More »

Scroll to Top