Jump to content
Eli Lilly and Beyond / IV. “Promise Utility Doctrine”
Eli Lilly and Beyond / IV. “Promise Utility Doctrine”
Contents
Chapter
Expand
|
Collapse
Page
1–14
Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
1–14
Details
15–17
I. Introduction
15–17
Details
18–30
II. International Legal Framework
18–30
Details
A. International Intellectual Property Law
Details
1. International Intellectual Property Treaties
Details
B. International Investment Law
Details
1. International Investment Agreements
Details
2. International Investment Arbitration
Details
3. Intellectual Property Rights as Protected Investments
Details
C. NAFTA
Details
31–39
III. Eli Lilly v. Canada – Facts and Proceedings
31–39
Details
A. Eli Lilly’s Patents in Canadian Courts
Details
1. Strattera Patent
Details
2. Zyprexa Patent
Details
B. Investment Arbitration Proceedings
Details
1. Eli Lilly’s Position
Details
2. Canada’s Position
Details
C. Legitimate Expectations in Relation to International Intellectual Property Standards
Details
1. Eli Lilly’s Position
Details
2. Canada’s Position
Details
40–49
IV. “Promise Utility Doctrine”
40–49
Details
A. Canadian Law and Courts
Details
B. Patent Law in Canada
Details
1. Historical Developments
Details
2. Pharmaceutical Patents in Canada
Details
3. Patent Law Basic Principles
Details
a) Protectable Subject Matter
Details
b) Patentability Requirements
Details
(1) Novelty
Details
(2) Non-Obviousness
Details
(3) Utility
Details
(a) Demonstrated Utility
Details
(b) Sound Prediction Doctrine
Details
(3) Promise of a Patent
Details
C. Compliance of Doctrine with International Intellectual Property Standards
Details
50–66
V. Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard and Legitimate Expectations
50–66
Details
A. Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard
Details
1. General Characteristics
Details
2. The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard under NAFTA
Details
a) Metalclad v. Mexico
Details
b) S. D. Myers v. Canada
Details
c) Pope & Talbot v. Canada
Details
d) Mondev v. USA
Details
e) Waste Management v. Mexico
Details
B. Legitimate Expectations
Details
1. General Characteristics
Details
a) Legitimate Expectations Arising out of Contractual Basis
Details
b) Legitimate Expectations Arising out of Representations of State
Details
c) Legitimate Expectations Arising out of State’s Regulatory Framework
Details
2. Legitimate Expectations under NAFTA
Details
a) Thunderbird v. Mexico
Details
b) Glamis Gold v. USA
Details
c) Grand River v. USA
Details
d) Mobil v. Canada
Details
3. Legitimate Expectations and Intellectual Property in Investment Arbitration
Details
a) Philip Morris v. Australia
Details
b) Philip Morris v. Uruguay
Details
67–74
VI. Legitimate Expectations, Intellectual Property Rights and International Intellectual Property Law Framework – Eli Lilly and Beyond
67–74
Details
A. Eli Lilly and Legitimate Expectations
Details
1. Customary International Law
Details
2. Representations of State
Details
a) Patents as Representations of State
Details
b) Patentability Requirement Standards as Representations
Details
3. Direct Application of International Intellectual Property Norms
Details
4. “Arbitrary”, “Grossly Unfair”, “Unjust” or “Idiosyncratic” Changes in Law
Details
B. Eli Lilly outside of NAFTA – International Investment Agreements and TRIPS as a Source of Legitimate Expectations
Details
75–76
VII. Is Conformity with International Intellectual Property Norms Enough?
75–76
Details
77–78
VIII. Conclusions
77–78
Details
79–84
List of Works Cited
79–84
Details
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY
Access
Eli Lilly and Beyond , page 40 - 49
IV. “Promise Utility Doctrine”
Autoren
Ivan Stepanov
DOI
doi.org/10.5771/9783845293110-40
ISBN print: 978-3-8487-5109-9
ISBN online: 978-3-8452-9311-0
Chapter Preview
Chapter Preview
Share
Download PDF
Download citation
RIS
BibTeX
Copy DOI link
doi.org/10.5771/9783845293110-40
Share by email
Video schließen
Share by email Nomos eLibrary
Recipient*
Sender*
Message*
Your name
Send message
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.
