1. OGH: Nasenspray als Medizinprodukt oder (Funktions-/Präsentations)Arzneimittel?
- Author
-
Hebenstreit, Sonja
- Subjects
- *
ADMINISTRATIVE courts , *INTRANASAL medication , *APPELLATE courts , *MEDICAL equipment , *LEGAL judgments , *PHARMACEUTICAL industry , *MUCOUS membranes , *SARS-CoV-2 , *FEDERAL courts , *PUBLIC health laws - Abstract
The article discusses whether a specific nasal spray should be classified as a medical device or as a medicinal product. According to the Supreme Court, this nasal spray, which primarily acts physically and neutralizes viruses before they affect the mucous membrane, is not considered a medicinal product. The misleading of a product is only examined based on specific claims. The appellate court classified the nasal spray as a medical device because it has a physical effect and neutralizes viruses before they attack the mucous membrane. The plaintiff argued that the product should be classified as a medicinal product and contains misleading statements. The Supreme Court confirmed the appellate court's decision and referred to a decision of the German Federal Administrative Court. The question of whether it is a presentation medicinal product was no longer relevant in the appeal process. [Extracted from the article]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF