Estonia, Legislation, Markets and Companies, Medicine
International Internet Magazine. Baltic States news & analytics
Saturday, 20.04.2024, 13:25
Tartu Court does not consider Apotheka's notice of appeal to be without perspective
Print version |
|---|
Terve Pere Apteek submitted an application of preliminary legal protection as part of a
notice of appeal with which the pharmacy is applying for the decision made by
the Agency of Medicines on Oct. 5 to be revoked. The decision partly suspended
the activity license of the pharmacy on the premises located at 19 Sutiste
Street in Tallinn. The Agency of Medicines explained their stance by saying
that as of Oct. 1 this year, the pharmacy does not have a valid rental
agreement with PERH to use the latter's premises to render its services.
The main aim of preliminary legal protection is to ensure that preliminary
protection of the rights of the appellant if it may later become significantly
difficult or impossible with a court decision. According to the preliminary
assessment of the court, the notice of appeal in its current stage cannot be
considered to be without perspective. Should the court have left the
application of the appellant unsatisfied, the pharmacy would not have been
allowed to provide services on the premises in question during the court proceedings.
However, taking a stance on the application of preliminary legal protection is
not the substantial resolution of the notice of appeal, the court said.
The administrative court said that as the pharmacy and PERH are in a
dispute in an ongoing civil matter over the legality of the continued use of
the premises that is being handled by the Harju County Court, the private
circumstances between the parties are at present unclear. Documents submitted
to the administrative court do not show that public interest or the right of
persons involved would be damaged if the court suspends the validity of the
challenged decision.
The court found that the holding of the premises or the legal basis for
using them do not depend on the validity of the activity license in question. A
valid activity license is not a prerequisite for the legal holding of the
premises. The fact whether the pharmacy has a legal basis for using the
premises or not will be determined in county court proceedings. If it should be
determined that the pharmacy as of Oct. 1 did not have a legal basis for using
the rooms, both PERH and Benu Apteek
Eesti OU, another pharmacy that wishes to use the premises, have the right
to use private legal remedies against the appellant. Therefore, the validity of
the activity license does not irreversibly damage the interests or rights of
either PERH or the potential new service provider, the court said.
The court clarified that if needed, the pharmacy and the Agency of
Medicines have the right in every stage of the proceedings to apply for
Wednesday's regulation to be revoked or amended. If needed, the court will also
discuss the question concerning the application of preliminary legal protection
with both parties at a court sitting to be held on Nov. 14. The court with a
ruling at the latest is to decide over the question concerning the application
of preliminary legal protection again.
The regulation passed on Wednesday can be contested in the Tartu
administrative court within three working days.
«The Baltic Course» Is Sold and Stays in Business!
