European Besremi legal tussle continues

[Manouche]

« In the latest chapter in an ongoing contract dispute between AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH and Pharmaessentia Corp., the German Federal Court of Justice this week set aside the €143 million (US$162.8 million) in damages awarded to AOP, citing procedural flaws in quantifying the product supply and damages »bioworld.com/articles/51622...

[hunter5582]

Do you know precisely what "procedural flaws in quantifying the product supply and damages" refers to? It would be interesting to know more about what is going on.

[Manouche in reply to hunter5582]

It would be interesting to know. Unfortunately I can’t access to the full article.

[Dovme in reply to Manouche]

This was posted a week or so on the forum another thread

aop-health.com/global_en/ou...

[Manouche in reply to Dovme]

It says « Vienna, 25th March 2021 »

[Dovme in reply to Manouche]

Yes your right. But it’s the same topic. Damages are same. AOP headquarters are in Vienna. Thinking background?

[Manouche in reply to Dovme]

« German Federal Court of Justice Upholds AOP's License Rights in Ropeginterferon and PEC's Liability for Damages.On Monday February 14, 2022 the German Federal Court of Justice decided on PEC's challenge of the award in the dispute between AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH and PharmaEssentia Corporation. The decision confirmed that PharmaEssentia's attempts to deprive AOP of its license rights in Ropeginterferon alpha-2b have failed. It upholds the award finding the License Agreement valid and PharmaEssentia liable for certain damages and dismissing all PharmaEssentia's claims against AOP. However, it finds procedural flaws with respect to product supply and damage quantification, impacting the damages awarded. AOP will continue BESREMi® sales and claim all damages ».

businesswire.com/news/home/....

[pepper- in reply to hunter5582]

Here is a comprehensive case analysis. Lot's of legalese: casetext.com/case/aop-orpha...

[Joey1025 in reply to hunter5582]

Hi hunter, I just came across this old post. This blog post I recently found provides a easy-readable summary of the German court's decision.

hanefeld-legal.com/blog/bgh...

It seems the court considered that the arbitral tribunal explained sufficiently that Pharma Essential intentionally breached the contract with AOP for one claim, but failed to explain why for another claim the breach was also intentional. Also some misreading of the Pharma Essential's objection to the amount of damages were noted by the court.

[EPguy]

My take is PharmaEssentia (PEC) remains the equivalent of guilty on all counts. PEC had << request(ed) again that the award be set aside>> This set-aside is not going to happen but the damages may be adjusted to a relatively minor extent.

[pepper-]

Complete case analysis: casetext.com/case/aop-orpha...

[hunter5582 in reply to pepper-]

What a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo!

[taurussy]

If I have any difficulties in the process of doing business, most often I turn to lawyers for help. But nevertheless, I believe that it's necessary to sort out such moments on my own with the help of blogs such as this one at the link pandawaiver.com/blog/. This is a blog by Pandadoc whose products I often use for working with documents.