Judgment Header
AstraZeneca AB (SE) v Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 16
Court DecisionSGHC
[2012] SGHC 16
[2012] SGHC 16
General Division of the High Court of Singapore19 Jan 2012Suit No 416 of 2011 (Summons 5001/2011/M)
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 2 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
2Later cases and laws citing this decision
“es Act instead of the Patents Act and, as such, s 82(1) of the Patents Act should not have been applicable at all. In this regard, Ms Leow cited AstraZeneca AB (SE) v Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 16 (“Sanofi-Aventis”) at [30] for the proposition that an action brought pursuant to s 12A of the Medicines”
“nt infringement action would have required particulars of past infringing acts: see ss 66 and 67 of the PA and O 87A r 2(2) of the ROC; see also AstraZeneca AB (SE) v Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Pte Ltd [2012] SGHC 16 (“AstraZeneca”) at [20]–[23] and [30]. Instead, the Plaintiff relied on reg 24(1)(a)(i) of the TPR and, a”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Suit No 416 of 2011 (Summons 5001/2011/M)
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2012-01-19
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.