Man fined over selling Copied drugs online..

[admin]

At a hearing in the Blackfriars Crown Court on 5 February 2009 James Ellis-Jones pleaded guilty to counts 1 and 2 and, on behalf of Regulus Systems Limited, to counts 13 and 14. The remaining matters were left to lie on the file.

The case was opened by the prosecution on the basis that: Tamiflu is a POM and its unregulated use can potentially lead to health dangers.

The defendant accepted that he had supplied Tamiflu in his basis of plea.

Over 4,000 packages of Tamiflu were recovered after a search in January 2006 and further packages were intercepted at the airport. Therefore in addition to any monies made by Mr Ellis-Jones for Tamiflu already supplied, he stood to gain considerably financially had he not been intercepted.

An application was granted for the forfeiture of the seized Tamiflu.

The defendant was then sentenced as follows:
Count 1: £500 fine
Count 2: £1000 fine
Count 13: No separate penalty
Count 14: No separate penalty
Prosecution costs of £2000 payable to MHRA.

Count 1
Assembling a medicinal product without a licence, contrary to sections 8(2) and 45(1) of the Medicines Act 1968 James Ellis-Jones, on or before 11 January 2006 assembled medicinal products, namely Tamiflu without a manufacturers licence.

Count 2
Possession of a medicinal product with intent to supply it, contrary to sections 67(3)A and 67(4) of the Medicines Act 1968 James Ellis-Jones, on or before 11 January 2006 had in his possession a medicinal product, namely Tamiflu to which paragraph (a) of Section 58(2) of the Medicines Act 1968 applies, with the intention of supplying it otherwise than in accordance with the requirements of that paragraph.

Count 13
Assembling a medicinal product without a licence, contrary to sections 8(2), 45(1) and 124(1) of the Medicines Act 1968 Regulus Systems Limited, on or before 11 January 2006, in the course of a business carried on by it, assembled medicinal products, namely Tamiflu without a manufacturers licence.

Count 14
Possession of a medicinal product with intent to supply it, contrary to sections 67(3)A and 67(4) of the Medicines Act 1968 Regulus Systems Limited on or before 11 January 2006 had in its possession a medicinal product, namely Tamiflu to which paragraph (a) of Section 58(2) of the Medicines Act 1968 applies, with the intention of supplying it otherwise than in accordance with the requirements of that paragraph.

Regina v Gwyn Edge Evans
Mr Gwyn Edge Evans (56) from The Cottage, Millwood Rise, Overton-on-Dee, Wrexham, LL13 0EL was fined £4,000 and £1,500 costs at Southwark Crown Court on 20 October 2008 after pleading guilty to four offences under the Medicines Act 1968 for the illegal assembly, sale and supply of unlicensed medicines, including some sex drugs. The sentencing followed a prosecution by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

Mr Evans imported unlicensed medicines through his Wrexham-based company G E Evans Holding Company between 25 May 2005 and 27 July 2006. These medicines had been exported from India on behalf of a buyer in Mauritius, addressed to Mr Evans’ company. MHRA investigators visited Mr Evans’ company and found in the corner of his office two tall storage cabinets containing a number of small storage containers on the shelves. Each container contained capsules or tablets in vacuum sealed packets of varying sizes. The contents were unlicensed medicines in the form of Sildenafil and Tadalafil (both used to treat erectile dysfunction), Carisoprodol (used as a muscle relaxant) and Sibutramine Hydrochloride (used to treat obesity). Some 91,000 tablets were seized along with a bundle of documentation which contained records of imports received by the company. In addition to this quantity, 65,670 similar tablets and capsules were seized at Stansted Airport and a document was also identified that showed Mr Evans’ company were in receipt of some 22 consignments of unlicensed medicines between May 2005 and February 2006. These shipments totalled some 475,764 tablets and capsules.

Mick Deats, Group Manager of Enforcement at the MHRA said, “This investigation clearly demonstrates our commitment to safeguard public health. It is essential that medicines for human use are sold safely and licensed correctly. It is right that people like Mr Evans are punished when these rules are flouted. This should serve as a deterrent to others who have little or no regard for public health or the Medicines Act.”