Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:18:52.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Stem Cell Corporation V. Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (C.J.E.U.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Aurora Plomer
Aurora Plomer*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol Law School, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On December 18, 2014, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its judgment in International Stem Cell Corporation v. Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks. The Court held that the term “human embryo” does not cover unfertilized human eggs produced by parthenogenesis (parthenotes).

Type
International Legal Documents
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 55 , Issue 4 , August 2016 , pp. 731 - 739
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Endnotes

1 Case C-364/13, International Stem Cell Corporation v. Comptroller General of Patents, Designs & Trademarks (Dec. 18, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/celex.jsf?celex=62006CJ0279&langl=en&type=TXT&ancre= [hereinafter International Stem Cell].

2 Case C-34/10, Brüstle v. Greenpeace e.V., 2011 E.C.R. I-0982.

3 Council Directive 98/44/EC, 1998 OJ. (L 213) (EU).

4 Id. paras. 15, 16.

5 International Stem Cell, supra note 1, ¶ 25

6 Id. ¶ 12.

7 International Stem Cell Corporation v. Comptroller-General of Patents, [2014] 2 R.P.C. 89, 89-90 (Eng.).

8 Case C-364/13, International Stem Cell Corporation v. Comptroller-General of Patents, Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón, ¶ 69 (July 17, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=155123&pagelndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=flrst&part=l&cid=1076027.

9 International Stem Cell, supra note 1, ¶31.

10 Id. ¶ 28.

11 Id. ¶ 24.

12 Case T-561/14, One of Us and Others v. Parlement and Others (July 25, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=160007&pagelndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=flrst&part=l&cid=188122.

13 Parrillo v. Italy, Eur. Ct. H.R. (Aug. 27, 2015), http:// hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i&eq;001-157263.

14 For an example of a promising project that has reached the clinical trial phase, see University College London’s First Phase One trial to determine the safety of transplanted cells. Phase I Trial to Determine the Safety of Transplanting Stem Cell-Derived Retinal Cells, University College London, https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ioo/genetics/gene-and-cell-therapy/our-research-programme/current-gene-cell-therapy-clinical-trials/accordion 01/ACT-stem-cells (last updated July 7, 2015). More generally, see Eurostemcell Hub, http://www.eurostemcell.org/ (last visited Aug. 15, 2016).

* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Court of Justice of the European Union website (visited August 1, 2016), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri&eq;;CELEX%3A62013CJ0364.