Head of EIP Life holds workshop on devising effective SPC strategies

No items found.
​
04 July 2011
Tags
Life

Andrew Sharples, the head of EIP Life, moderated a workshop on how pharma can gain effective patent lifecycle extensions through supplementary protection certificates (SPCs).

The pre-conference workshop at the 10th annual forum on Pharma Patent Lifecycles in London on 20 June explored the practical considerations for devising effective SPC strategies in light of recent regulatory and case law developments across the US and Europe. Andrew was joined by co-moderators Daniel Wise and Edward Oates from Carpmaels & Ransford.

The workshop addressed key issues including:

  • Which patent should you choose?
  • How should you define the product?
  • Which marketing authorisation should you cite?
  • When should you file?
  • Other factors to consider
  • Avoiding the pitfalls when seeking multiple and follow-on SPCs
  • Assessing the extent of obtaining SPCs for medical devices
  • How to strategically amend your patents to improve your SPC position
  • Taking paediatric extensions into account

Andrew Sharples said: “With legal uncertainty over so many aspects of SPCs, it is important to take into account all the various factors affecting SPCs in devising a filing strategy which maximises valuable protection.”

Related articles

EIP strengthens Swedish presence with dedicated Malmö office
10 November 2026
EIP has strengthened its presence in Sweden with a dedicated Malmö office, reflecting the continued growth of our team in southern Sweden. The Malmö team supports innovative businesses with intellectual property expertise, helping them protect their ideas and maximise their commercial value.
EIP named in The Times Best Law Firms for a second year running
05 November 2026
EIP have been named in The Times Best Law Firms 2027 and commended for intellectual property, for the second consecutive year.
EIP ranked Band 1 in Chambers UK 2027, with three lawyers also recognised
14 October 2026
Chambers recognised EIP for its patent litigation work and its strength in disputes concerning FRAND licensing and standard essential patents.