Émirats arabes unis
Brevets (y compris la protection des variétés végétales)
Follow-up question: In your answer, you mention that "in defending its position, the owner of the patent cannot introduce imported product as a valid ground. It does not present a legitimate reason for avoiding compulsory licensing [...]". Please confirm whether, according to your legislation, importation is considered as working the patent and satisfies therefore the requirement of use/exploitation of the patent. If this should not be the case, please explain how this complies with the obligations contained in Article 27.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, requiring patent rights to be enjoyable without discrimination as to whether products are imported or locally produced.
The Patent and Designs Law does not provide for any provision aimed at discriminating patents on the basis of the place of invention, the field of technology and whether the products are imported or locally produced. The approved amendment of the Article 23 of the Patent and Designs Law doesn’t stipulate any more that the importation of the product is not considered legal justification for the owner to avoid compulsory licence. Therefore, the Patent law related provisions are now in conformity with Article 27 and 31 of the TRIPS Agreement.