SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
 número26Importância Atribuída ao Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa (CEP)Una aproximación bibliográfica al problema del mal en la naturaleza índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Revista de Bioética y Derecho

versión On-line ISSN 1886-5887

Resumen

GUILLEM-TATAY PEREZ, David. It is not patentable a biotechnological invention involving the destruction of human embryos.: Meaning and scope of the sentence CJEU in case C-34/10. Rev. Bioética y Derecho [online]. 2012, n.26, pp.44-54. ISSN 1886-5887.  https://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S1886-58872012000300006.

Last October 18th, the European Union Court of Justice pronounced a sentence in order to answer some prejudicial questions, and concluded that a procedure in which stem cells are extracted from a human embryo, being considered so since it´s conception, it´s not patentable if this procedure itself implies the embryo´s destruction. The sentence makes a legal analysis about a series of articles of the Directive 98/44/EC, about the Law of patents in biotechnological inventions. Given the publication of the sentence has been evaluated by multiple articles criticizing or exalting the European Union Court of Justice´s resolution, the main objective of this article is to analyze accurately the legal meaning of the sentence.

Palabras clave : Brüstle; Greenpeace; TJUE; patents; biotechnology.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons