AstraZeneca says EU loses legal bid for more vaccine

[EasterIssland]

AstraZeneca says EU loses legal bid for more vaccine supplies by end-June

AstraZeneca (AZN.L) on Friday said the European Union had lost a legal case against the pharmaceutical firm over the supply of COVID-19 vaccines as a court in Brussels rejected an EU request for more deliveries by the end of June.

The Anglo-Swedish firm committed in a contract to do its best to deliver to the 27-nation bloc 300 million doses by the end of June, but production problems led the pharmaceutical company to revise down its target to 100 million vaccines.

The cuts in the supplies delayed the EU's vaccination drive in the first quarter of the year, when the bloc had initially bet on AstraZeneca to deliver the largest volume of jabs. That led to a bitter dispute and to the EU's legal action to get at least 120 million doses by the end of June.

But the judge said the company should only deliver 80.2 million doses by a deadline of Sept. 27, AstraZeneca said.

www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

I would have thought that AZ ordered to pay 70% of costs and EU to pay 30% gives the balance of the judgement for and against.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

The EU’s behaviour over this has been nothing short of contemptible

Quite so

Does anyone know if we're making all our AZ supply in the UK now, or are we still getting any from EU countries? Because if it's the latter, I'd worry that they'll now find a way to blockade it out of spite

They can't really. The court has made a decision. They are now obliged to obey that. It actually means AZ are in a much better position with exports. All they have to do is deliver the extra 10 million doses

They can actually export more now than before the court ruling in theory. This is because tbe EU would breach the court order if it tried to take more. Which is rather a own goal to the EU.

@TruelyonelastSchlep

The court also ruled that AstraZeneca should have used its British production sites to deliver to the EU

This is how the EU are trying to claim a victory. A couple of points here that are pigging obvious.

*The court has said AZ has delivered appropriately to their contract

*The court have said AZ need only deliver 10 million more doses by a date in September

*The court have said they should uses the UK site to help do this if necessary

*AZ have already said they plan to deliver more than this amount without the UK site anyway

Total political spin attempt by the high priestess of the EU me thinks 🙃

No that amount is completely wrong. 50 million doses by September 27th. In staggered amounts of various millions by July, then August and then more finally in September. You can read it at the end of the court judgement itself (in French, but readable).

So AZ don’t have to pay a penalty now

But have to deliver starting in July

Why do AZ say they’ve won and vice versa

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/18/eu-fails-in-court-action-to-secure-urgent-120m-doses-of-oxford-covid-vaccine

@HilaryThorpe the court ordered AstraZeneca to pay just 30% of the commission’s legal fees, with a cap set at €4,000 (£3,440).

My point is that have been sick of all the anti EU threads on here over the last few months, they have been disgusting. Little gets through when the EU is doing well.

@HilaryThorpe

I would have thought that AZ ordered to pay 70% of costs and EU to pay 30% gives the balance of the judgement for and against.

That is just if it does not meet the order from what I am reading. Which the judge has just set at 80 million up until September.

AZ has already delivered 70 million and have said they will deliver more than 10 million before the court ruling. So the judge is actually setting a reduced expectation.

The court has made a decision. They are now obliged to obey that

In theory, yes, though it wouldn't be the first time the EU has flouted a legal decision ... not that we've got much room to talk either, with both the Cabinet and Health Ministers found to have behaved illegally

Basically they're politicians so will behave like politicians, hence the reason I worry about what their next step will be

@Humphriescushion

My point is that have been sick of all the anti EU threads on here over the last few months, they have been disgusting. Little gets through when the EU is doing well.

We can criticise politicians all we like thanks. Whether hear or abroad. That is how politics work. If nobody criticises. We would be North Korea.

AZ has already delivered 70 million and have said they will deliver more than 10 million before the court ruling. So the judge is actually setting a reduced expectation.

Ok this sounds good.

The court ordered AstraZeneca to pay just 30% of the commission’s legal fees, with a cap set at €4,000 (£3,440)

So given that this is pocket change to a company like AZ, the net effect is that they have to pay practically nothing

Good

The EU is just having a hissy fit because they had to pay three times as much for Pfizer while stockpiling AZ, delaying vaccinations, and incurring thousands more deaths as a result.

They’re losing so much credibility that I think once this is all over more EU countries will be looking to exit.

I’m hopeful AZ will fulfil their legal obligations then crack on with getting extra doses out to Africa and countries that really need it. At cost. Cheap. Not for profit.

Ok I can see people may get confused about the figures

*The ruling is 80 million doses

*AZ is on record as delivering 30 million doses in the first quarter

*However AZ say they have now delivered 70 million doses to date

All this means they only have 10 million to deliver not 50 million

Does anyone know if it is definite and true that Macron is to be the next head of the commission?

😱

@Puzzledandpissedoff

The court ordered AstraZeneca to pay just 30% of the commission’s legal fees, with a cap set at €4,000 (£3,440)

So given that this is pocket change to a company like AZ, the net effect is that they have to pay practically nothing

Good

It’s the other way around- AZ to pay 70% of costs. This indicates that the way the court saw the parties winning/loosing (EU not getting a full win but a very clear one).

The court seems to have agreed with the EU that AZ was in serious breach of their contractual obligations - AZ is at "serious fault". Not exporting from UK had "significant damaging repercussions" and was "for the benefit of 3rd parties, in disregard of its contractual obligations"

But court disagreed with some of the EUs demands for specific performance (no. of doses and specific dates it wanted delivery)

That’s not what it says on the Guardian article?

Comparing a couple of headlines is amusing. One is that AZ welcomes the judgement. The other is that the EU welcomes the judgement.

How can it be so topsy turvy

The who paid must be verifiable

It is 70% legal costs to AZ in the judgement in French!

Awarded to , or liable to?

I can't find anything reliable about the court costs. The articles either don't mention them or are saying different things.

Anyone found a decide source yet?

Dave Keating on Twitter has the French text.

www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2021/06/18/covid-19-l-union-europeenne-obtient-en-justice-moins-de-doses-de-vaccin-que-reclame-a-astrazeneca_6084726_3244.html

No mention of costs, just that (amongst other things) the verdict was welcomed by both parties.

@HilaryThorpe

Dave Keating on Twitter has the French text.

Found it, interesting, thank you...

So is the Guardian article correct?