1.0Courts and Tribunals Judiciaryhttps://www.judiciary.ukrich600338<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="YLRS6ZDhQs"><a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/live-hearings/1-merck-kgaa-appellant-v-the-secretary-of-state-for-health-and-social-care-and-others-respondents-2-lundbeck-limited-and-others-appellants-v-the-secretar/">(1) Merck KGaA (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (2) Lundbeck Limited and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (3) Generics (U.K) Limited (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (4) Arrow Generics Limited and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (5) Xellia Pharmaceuticals APS and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (6) Resolution Chemicals Limited (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (7) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and another (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents)</a></blockquote><iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://www.judiciary.uk/live-hearings/1-merck-kgaa-appellant-v-the-secretary-of-state-for-health-and-social-care-and-others-respondents-2-lundbeck-limited-and-others-appellants-v-the-secretar/embed/#?secret=YLRS6ZDhQs" width="600" height="338" title="“(1) Merck KGaA (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (2) Lundbeck Limited and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (3) Generics (U.K) Limited (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (4) Arrow Generics Limited and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and others (respondents) (5) Xellia Pharmaceuticals APS and others (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (6) Resolution Chemicals Limited (appellant) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents) (7) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and another (appellants) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and ors (respondents)” — Courts and Tribunals Judiciary" data-secret="YLRS6ZDhQs" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"></iframe><script type="text/javascript"> /* <![CDATA[ */ /*! This file is auto-generated */ !function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document); /* ]]> */ </script> Wednesday 26 March 2025 Whether claim is time-barred under Limitation Act 1980 and the correct construction of the CAT Rules 2015. These are appeals against the decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal, dated 21 June 2024), which dismissed the contention that the claim is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. The judgment followed the trial […]