Go back to News
NEWS
Miguel Troncoso in CGAE article on the EU case against AstraZeneca
6 of May, 2021
Miguel Troncoso, managing partner of the Brussels office of Gómez-Acebo & Pombo and expert in competition law and State aid, has contributed to the article published on the website of the General Council of Spanish Lawyers. delves into the EU’s demand aimed at securing doses contracted to the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca, rather than receiving compensation. According to Troncoso’s opinion, “the supply contract does not provide for contractual penalties or compensation in favour of the EU in the event of non-compliance, at least in the version that has been made public. Therefore, the lawsuit is aimed at obliging AstraZeneca to supply the vaccines in the agreed quantity and on time”.
In addition, it should be noted that “the version of the contract that has come to light is not complete, since confidential information or AstraZeneca’s business secrets have been concealed,” Troncoso points out. As the company maintains, the contract was signed on the basis of what is known as “best efforts”, that is to say, that it was committed to doing “everything possible” to comply with the agreement. This undertaking was affected, according to AstraZeneca, first by a storm at the end of January that affected the production line at its factory in Wales, and subsequently by the suspension of vaccination in many countries after side effects were detected in some people receiving the vaccine.
Read the full article here
In addition, it should be noted that “the version of the contract that has come to light is not complete, since confidential information or AstraZeneca’s business secrets have been concealed,” Troncoso points out. As the company maintains, the contract was signed on the basis of what is known as “best efforts”, that is to say, that it was committed to doing “everything possible” to comply with the agreement. This undertaking was affected, according to AstraZeneca, first by a storm at the end of January that affected the production line at its factory in Wales, and subsequently by the suspension of vaccination in many countries after side effects were detected in some people receiving the vaccine.
Read the full article here
Press contact
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
17 Feb, 2026 
PUBLICATION
03 Mar, 2026
Legal doctrine of the UPC’s Court of Appeal on the patent invalidity defence: is the way in which the ‘long arm’ is applied compatible with the UPC's own Rules of Procedure?
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court has ruled that a patent invalidity defence cannot be raised before the Unified Patent Court, with only a counterclaim being possible. This calls into question the way in which the ‘long arm’ is being applied with regard to European patents validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), whether or not they are members of the European Union, since no counterclaim for revocation or plea of invalidity as a defence can be filed or raised with regard to such patents. This raises significant doubts about the compatibility of how the ‘long arm’ is applied in the Unified Patent Court system, given its own Rules of Procedure.
03 Mar, 2026 
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
Pharma & Healthcare No. 47
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
26 Feb, 2026
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.
27 Jan, 2026
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.
21 Jan, 2026
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.
15 Jan, 2026
PUBLICATION
09 Dec, 2025
Pharma & Healthcare No. 46
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
09 Dec, 2025
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.).
28 Oct, 2025
PUBLICATION
30 Sep, 2025
Court of Justice rules that lower courts may disregard decisions of higher courts that violate independence and impartiality
The Court of Justice ruling of 4 September 2025 (C-225/22) has declared that national courts may set aside decisions of higher courts that do not comply with the requirements of independence and impartiality derived from Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
30 Sep, 2025
PUBLICATION
25 Sep, 2025
Prohibition of arbitration in the single energy market
The Agreement on the interpretation and application of the Energy Charter Treaty gives the force and effect of law to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, according to which Article 26 of the Energy Charter Treaty does not and could not apply as a legal basis for intra-EU arbitration proceedings as a mechanism for the settlement of disputes between a contracting State and an investor of another contracting State.
25 Sep, 2025