Go back to News
NEWS
GA_P advises on Grifols’ €1.300m bond issue
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo has advised the underwriters of the 1,300 million euros bonds issued by Grifols, maturing in May 2030.
The net proceeds of the transaction, which was subject to New York law, will be used mainly to repay existing debt and to fully repay the outstanding revolving loans, extending the credit facility until May 2027.
The team consisted of: Álvaro Sáinz, Irene Medina de Alba and Patricia González de Huelbes from the Banking and Finance team in Madrid and London respectively.
Lawyer mentioned
Álvaro Sáinz – Partner
Tipology
Deal
Press contact
Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Warning: Undefined array key 2 in /app/wp-content/plugins/wpml-media-translation/classes/class-wpml-media-attachment-by-url-query.php on line 99
Warning: Undefined array key 2 in /app/wp-content/plugins/wpml-media-translation/classes/class-wpml-media-attachment-by-url-query.php on line 163
Warning: Undefined array key 10 in /app/wp-content/plugins/wpml-media-translation/classes/class-wpml-media-attachment-by-url-query.php on line 163
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
PUBLICATION
27 Jan, 2026
Jurisdiction of national courts of States party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court in respect of actions relating to classic European patents during the transitional period
During the transitional period of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, national courts retain jurisdiction to hear cases concerning classic European patents, without the need for the proprietor to have exercised the opt-out option, i.e. without the need to have excluded the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court over such patents. However, the Venice Court ruling discussed here considers that national courts may only be used if the opt-out has been exercised, contradicting the provisions of Article 83 of the Agreement.
PUBLICATION
21 Jan, 2026
Incompatibility between practising a healthcare profession and having a pecuniary interest in the manufacture or sale of medicinal products or medical devices
Royal Legislative Decree 1/2015, of 24 July, approving the recast version of the Medicinal Products and Medical Devices (Guarantees and Rational Use) Act, prohibits healthcare professionals with prescribing powers from having a direct pecuniary interest in activities related to medicines. This prohibition does not extend to indirect interests, as distinguished in Article 4 of said legislative decree. Judgment no. 483/2025 of the High Court of Justice of the Basque Country concludes that mere membership of a group of companies does not entail incompatibility if each entity retains real autonomy.
PUBLICATION
15 Jan, 2026
Excessive extension of the Bolar clause in the 'pharmaceutical legislative package'
The Bolar clause allows studies and trials necessary to obtain marketing authorisations for medicinal products to be carried out without infringing patents. Its scope has grown during the passage of the pharmaceutical legislative package, incorporating more actors and more activities, to include participation in public tenders before the patent expires. This extension raises questions about compatibility with the TRIPS Agreement, which only allows limited exceptions to patent rights. Participation in tenders could be considered an offer to sell, thus violating the limits set by that agreement.
PUBLICATION
09 Dec, 2025
Pharma & Healthcare No. 46
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
PUBLICATION
28 Oct, 2025
Borderline products and the precedence of medicinal product legislation
The application of the rule of precedence requires, firstly, that a given product falls within the legal definition of a medicinal product, whether it is a medicinal product by function or by presentation, and secondly, that there are doubts as to whether it also falls within the legal concept of other types of products (food supplements, cosmetics, etc.).
PUBLICATION
09 Oct, 2025
Payment service providers’ rectification of unauthorised or incorrectly executed payment transactions: user obligations
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Fourth Chamber), in its judgment of 1 August 2025, case C-665/23, IL v. Veracash SAS, concludes that a payer is deprived of the right to reimbursement of the amount of an unauthorised transaction if he or she delayed in notifying his or her payment service provider of the unauthorised payment transaction, even though he or she did so within 13 months from the debit date. This interpretation of the Payment Services Directive is applicable in Spain (Art. 43 RDL 19/2018) and appears to be retained in the future Regulation on payment services.
PUBLICATION
25 Sep, 2025
Pharma & Healthcare No. 45
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
PUBLICATION
30 Jul, 2025
Absolute prohibitions on pharmacy advertising are contrary to EU law
In its judgment of 19 June 2025 (European Commission v Republic of Poland, C‑200/24, ECLI:EU:C:2025:459), the Court of Justice has held that the introduction by national legislation of a total prohibition on advertising for pharmacies infringes European Union law.
PUBLICATION
02 Jul, 2025
Pharma & Healthcare No. 44
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.