Brussels, 18/12/2014 (Agence Europe) - If a human ovum which is parthenogenically activated is not capable of developing into a human being, in other words it can under no circumstances lead to a human being, it can be patented, the Court of Justice of the EU ruled, in a verdict (case C-364/13) returned on Thursday 18 December, which unblocks the biotechnological development of so-called “regenerative” medicine.
The Court was ruling in a dispute in the United Kingdom, where the biotechnology company International Stem Cell Corporation (ISC) challenged the British justice system regarding the technology which produces pluripotent stem cells (which can develop into any cell of the human body) from parthenogenically activated ova, in other words ova activated in the absence of sperm. The company argued that these ova cannot be considered “human embryos” in the sense of directive 98/44/EC on the protection of biotechnological inventions, as they are incapable of becoming human beings due to the absence of paternal DNA (EUROPE 11125).
The Court upheld ISC's argument. It takes the view that an unfertilised human ovum must necessarily have the “intrinsic ability” to develop into a human being in order to be classified as a “human embryo”, and is therefore eligible to enjoy the legal protection offered by Community law which prohibits the patenting of such an embryo to be used for industrial or commercial purposes. The fact that a human ovum begins a development process following its parthenogenic activation alone - with the aim of regenerating or recreating organs, for example - is not in itself enough to consider it as a “human embryo”, the Court finds.
In the present case, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office agreed with ISC that parthenogenically activated ova lack the capacity to develop into a human being, but declined to grant a patent on the grounds that inventions based on the use or destruction of human embryos are not patentable under European law. However, according to this verdict of the Court, there is now nothing to prevent the technology developed by ISC from being patented, as long as the national justice system is able to ensure, in light of international medical science, that the fundamental principle stressed by the European judges is respected. (JK)