Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo said that courts must balance and interpret laws on intellectual property (IP) rights to safeguard and prevent “misuse in creating monopolistic or anti-competitive market conditions.”
The judiciary’s role in Philippine economy “is not a passive one,” but one which “creates a legal landscape that will foster economic growth and ensure that the fruits of progress are equitably shared amongst all members of the community,” Gesmundo said.
“Through decisions which form part of the law of the land, and rules that ensure the proper exercise of government power, in balance with the fundamental rights of citizens, the Philippine judiciary has defined a legal framework conducive to the development of a free, vibrant, and competitive market,” he pointed out.
The Chief Justice delivered a keynote address before the delegates of the 10th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Competition Conference at Hotel Conrad Manila in Pasay City last Nov. 29. The two-day conference ends today, Nov. 30.
In his speech entitled “Balancing IP, Innovation and Competition in ASEAN Markets,” Gesmundo pointed out the Philippine judiciary ‘s role in shaping the country’s economy and society.
Immediately after the enactment of the Philippine Competition Act (PCA) in 2015, Gesmundo said the Supreme Court (SC) drafted the rules governing the applications, issuance, and enforcement of inspection orders for administrative investigations by the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC).
Citing two SC’s landmark decision on PCA, Gesmundo said that in Gios-Samar, Inc. vs Department of Transportation and Communication (G.R. No. 217158), the High Court clarified that what constitutes as monopolistic conduct in the grant of exclusive concession agreements is “when an entity which has achieved a dominant position in a relevant market engages in conduct in abuse of its dominant position.”
In Philippine Contractors Accreditation Board (PCAB) vs Manila Water Company (G.R. No. 217590), the SC nullified a provision in the Revised Rules and Regulations Governing Licensing and Accreditation of Constructors in the Philippines which reserves regular licenses “for contractor-firms of Filipino sole proprietorship or partnership/corporation with at least 60 percent Filipino equity participation,” he said.
In the PCAB case where the PCC served as amicus curiae (friend of the court), the SC declared that acts that can restrain competition include governmental acts such as laws passed by Congress, rules and regulations issued by administrative agencies, and even contracts entered into by the government with a private entity.
The SC has yet to decide a case specifically touching on the interplay between IP rights and the principles of fair competition under the PCA, Gesmundo said.
He emphasized the need for the Philippine judiciary to be “deeply aware of the socio-economic implications of its decisions.”
Theme of the conference is “From Innovation to Impact: Synergizing Antitrust and IP Regulation for a Stronger ASEAN.”
The SC’s public information office said the panelists and attendees are business leaders, IP experts, diplomats, ASEAN officers, and Competition Commission officials from Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Singapore as well as officials from the Philippine Competition Commission.
The PIO said plenary sessions include discussions on Advancing Merger Control and IP Regulation in ASEAN Pharma Markets, Combatting Anti-Competitive Practicing in ASEAN Pharma Markets, AI [artificial intelligence] and IP in Digital Platforms: A Future (Competition) Issue?, Seeds of Innovation: Promoting Access in Biotech through Competition, and Technology Transfer and Competition.