You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

May 14, 2015

Pharmaceutical Parallel Imports: A Solution or a Problem?

Vietnam Pharma Update

As a developing country with a large population, Vietnam has long viewed parallel imports as an effective antidote to the high price of innovator drugs. The parallel importation of medicines for the prevention and treatment of human diseases is permitted, and even encouraged, under Vietnamese law. Many pharmaceutical manufacturers, however, are understandably concerned that parallel importation could lead to diminished profits, thereby reducing research and development efforts, and leading to a slowdown in the innovation of new drugs. Even worse, in certain situations, parallel imports could put the public health at risk.

A recent case brought these issues to the forefront. A major European pharmaceutical innovator learned that a Vietnamese company was importing diabetes drugs into Vietnam that the company had manufactured for the Turkish market. While these drugs were “genuine” products of the manufacturer, and drugs under the same brand name had been authorized for circulation in Vietnam, the markets were not truly “parallel.” Turkey requires different standards for storage than Vietnam, and the quality of the drugs could deteriorate more rapidly in Vietnam’s tropical climate. Understanding that this could negatively impact consumer health as well as the manufacturer’s reputation, the European company called on Tilleke & Gibbins to map out a creative strategy to crack down on the parallel importation.

At the outset, we conducted a mark survey to determine the prevalence of the products in the market, and located the major distributors. We also examined the products to identify any violations of other prevailing laws, such as those in the regulatory area. Based on the fact finding, we called on the competent authorities to  tackle the situation.

In December 2014, the Hanoi Market Control Department in cooperation with the Inspectorate of the Department of Health conducted a sweep action against two major distributors of the products. After the raid, the authorities seized hundreds of parallel import products. We raised the authorities’ attention to the quality of the goods and pointed out some violations of labeling regulations that could mislead consumers. Within a month, with a view to protecting the public health, the authorities decided to sanction the distribution of the parallel imports by relying on regulatory aspects, especially labeling regulations, including imposing a monetary fine and seizing the products.

The authorities then sent a letter to the Drug Administration of Vietnam (DAV), bringing the DAV’s attention to the violations in particular and the parallel import situation in general. This may lead the DAV to take further precautions in granting licenses for parallel importation. In its recent practice, when weighing the decision to grant a parallel import license, the DAV has focused on the price and the name of the drugs, but not the quality or any special characteristics of the original market.

The affordability of drugs that comes with parallel importation is an undeniable benefit. However, the health authorities must also take into account the risks and complications posed by grey-market drugs, especially in relation to public health. In the future, it is expected that Vietnam will lay down further regulations on parallel importation to guarantee the quality of the imported drugs as well as the post-sales responsibility.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 25, 2021
Michael Ramirez, a counsel in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group in Bangkok, has updated the firm’s contribution to the Global Attorney-Client Privilege Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The newly expanded guide provides information on what constitutes attorney-client privilege in over 70 countries around the world. The Thailand section of the guide contains in-depth information on the function and applications of attorney-client privilege in Thailand (or, as explained in the guide, an equivalent concept enshrined in Thai law), including coverage of the following topics: Privilege in corporations Common interest doctrine Litigation funding Crime-fraud exception Work product doctrine/litigation privilege Other privileges including mediation, accountant-client and settlement negotiation The interactive guide features expert contributions by Lex Mundi member firms from jurisdictions worldwide. Readers can browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare attorney-client privilege in multiple jurisdictions. For more information, please visit the Lex Mundi website.
October 14, 2021
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2021. This guide outlines all of the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Guides to Doing Business series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource when planning an international business strategy or researching a new market.
October 11, 2021
A registration process for plant variety protection (PVP) has been in effect in Myanmar since enactment of the New Plant Variety Protection Law 2016, which was later replaced by the New Plant Variety Protection Law 2019 (“PVP Law 2019”). In accordance with its implementation of this law, the government is encouraging private companies, associations, organizations, and individual plant breeders to apply for the protection of new plant varieties in order to increase crop production in the country. Despite the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic in Myanmar, Tilleke & Gibbins successfully secured a plant breeder’s rights certificate for a client in June 2020, making the client the first certificate holder in Myanmar. This article summarizes the PVP application and registration process, and offers some practical insights into the authorities’ activities and approach. PVP Registration The Central Committee for National New Plant Variety Protection (PVP Committee) oversees PVP registration, which is administered by the PVP Section of the Department of Agricultural Research (DAR) in the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Irrigation. To apply for plant breeder’s rights in Myanmar, an application and a technical questionnaire on the new plant variety should be filed with the PVP Section, which reviews the technical questionnaire and determines whether the plant qualifies as a new variety. Four groups are eligible to apply for PVP registration in order to secure plant breeder’s rights under the current PVP legislation: Myanmar nationals; Foreign nationals and organizations whose permanent residence is in Myanmar; Persons or entities resident in a country that has a PVP agreement with Myanmar; and International organizations. An application can be examined in one of four ways (determined by the PVP Committee): Official field trial involving planting the new variety in Myanmar; On-site field inspection of the breeder’s field by the PVP Section; Examination of test
August 27, 2021
The process of registering pesticide products in Myanmar has been slowed significantly by regulatory challenges since the enactment of the Pesticide Law in 2016. In some cases, the whole process can take almost three years. Nonetheless, this stringent and time-consuming process has been functioning smoothly, and Tilleke & Gibbins has successfully received approvals from the Pesticide Registration Board (PRB) despite the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and state of emergency in the country. Overview Since its enactment, the Pesticide Law of 2016 has governed the regulation of local and imported pesticides under the oversight of the Plant Protection Division (PPD) and the joint secretary of the PRB. All foreign and domestic companies (including subsidiaries and joint ventures) looking to have their agricultural or household pest control products imported into Myanmar must first provide the products’ complete formulas and lists of active ingredients to the PPD, and apply for a pesticide registration certificate. Applications should be supported by a letter of consent from the manufacturer and various other technical documents and requirements. Experts at the PRB will review the technical dossier and inform the applicant if any re-submissions are required. Key Considerations One common cause of delay in the registration process is the requirement to submit both English and Myanmar translations of proposed labels to the PRB. Because the PRB takes a restrictive view of these labels and their translations, having the labels initially reviewed by a local regulatory expert familiar with the requirements will streamline the process by flagging potential issues for correction before submission to the PRB. After document submission is complete, the next stage of the process is further lab testing according to requirements set out by the Myanmar Pesticide Law. Applicants will need to supply the formulated product in an amount sufficient for carrying out supervised trials and