This is The Wall Street Journal's version of the news -- written by Peter Lofus -- and quoting a New Merck spokesperson, one of the defendants in the California action:
. . . .The California Supreme Court has reinstated a lawsuit in which retail pharmacies accused [most multinational branded public pharmaceutical manufacturers] of conspiring to set prices at artificially high levels. . . .
The independent pharmacies' lawsuit alleged that drug makers acted in concert to restrain importation into the U.S. of their lower-priced foreign drugs and to restrict price competition from cheaper generic drugs, resulting in drug prices 50% to 400% higher than for the same drugs sold outside the U.S. . . .
But the drug makers have disputed these claims. "We are disappointed with the result, but we continue to believe strongly, as we have since the beginning of the case, that the plaintiffs' underlying claims lack merit," said William J. Fenrich, an attorney for AstraZeneca who argued the drug makers' side before the California Supreme Court. "There is no conspiracy here, and we will be making those arguments as the case moves forward."
In addition to Pfizer and AstraZeneca, other defendants in the suit include Merck & Co. and GlaxoSmithKline PLC.
"Merck is very disappointed by the decision of the California Supreme Court in the Clayworth antitrust litigation," said Merck spokesman Ron Rogers. "We intend to continue to vigorously defend the case". . . .
Well keep you apprised.
No comments:
Post a Comment