Pharmaceutical duo vow to fight price fix charge
Both Aurobindo and Dr Reddy’s told the stock exchanges that the charges would not impact their financial performance
- Published 15.05.19, 12:41 AM
- Updated 15.05.19, 12:47 AM
- a min read
Drug majors Aurobindo Pharma and Dr Reddy’s Laboratories on Tuesday said they were preparing their legal defence to the charges of price fixing in the US market.
As many as 49 US states have filed price fixing charges against 20 generic pharmaceutical companies and 15 other individual defendants on Friday. Besides DRL and Aurobindo, charges have been filed against five other Indian companies — Glenmark, Lupin, Wockhardt, Zydus and Sun Pharma’s US arm Taro. All these are listed entities.
Both Aurobindo and Dr Reddy’s told the stock exchanges that the charges would not impact their financial performance.
The Aurobindo share price fell Rs 2.10, or 0.29 per cent, to Rs 715.20 on the BSE. Dr Reddy’s rose Rs 7.05, or 0.25 per cent, to Rs 2,812.
Aurobindo Pharma said the lawsuit filed by the US states on Friday was actually the second such suit, the first being filed in December 2016.
“On May 10, 2019, the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut and additional Attorneys’ General of various US states filed a second lawsuit in Federal Court similarly alleging that Aurobindo and other companies in the US generic drug industry had violated antitrust laws by fixing prices and allocating customers (the “Second State AG Action”),” the company said in a regulatory filing.
Aurobindo Pharma said it was currently reviewing the second lawsuit and said “we expect that we will be filing papers with the Federal Court in due course denying each of the relevant accusations”.
Dr Reddy’s on Tuesday said it would “vigorously defend” against allegations that it engaged in conspiracy to fix prices in the US.
“The complaint alleges that Dr Reddy’s US subsidiary and the other named defendants engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices... we intend to vigorously defend against these allegations and are in the process of filing our response with the District Court of Connecticut,” the company said.