The ECJ was requested to clarify the interpretation by an Arbitral Tribunal established in Portugal for solving a patent litigation case involving generic drugs under the Law 62/2011. Although a conventional arbitration tribunal is not a 'court or tribunal of a Member State' within the meaning of Article 267 TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) the ECJ admitted the request because this Arbitral Tribunal was established on a legislative basis with permanent compulsory jurisdiction (jurisdiction does not depend on the parties' agreement). The ECJ stressed that the decisions are taken by the Arbitral Tribunals under Law 62/2011 in accordance to national legislation which defines the applicable procedural rules and are binding on the parties.

On the substance, the ECJ reaffirmed that Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 concerning SPCs, read in conjunction with recital 9 to the same regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes the holder of both a patent and a supplementary protection certificate from relying on the entire period of validity of such a certificate, calculated in accordance with Article 13, in a situation where, pursuant to such a period, it would enjoy a period of exclusivity as regards an active ingredient, of more than 15 years from the first authorisation to be placed on the market, in the European Union, of a medicinal product consisting of that active ingredient, or containing it. In short, exclusivity conferred by an SPC cannot extend beyond 15 years after the first marketing authorisation of the relevant medicinal product.

This decision of the ECJ took the simple form of a reasoned order since the reply was deemed clear or could be concluded from past case-law.