United States: FDA Offers Some Clarity (But Few Concessions) On Off-Label Communication Of Medical Products

Among the flurry of policies the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released in the waning days of the Obama administration are several documents that seek to clarify the agency's positions on communications about medical products.

The documents are:

  • Draft Guidance: Medical Product Communications That Are Consistent with the FDA-Required Labeling1 (released January 18, 2017; available here)
  • Draft Guidance: Drug and Device Manufacturer Communications with Payors, Formulary Committees, and Similar Entities2 (released January 18, 2017; available here)
  • Memorandum, Public Health Interests and First Amendment Considerations Related to Manufacturer Communications Regarding Unapproved Uses of Approved or Cleared Medical Products3 (released January 19, 2017; available here)
  • Final Rule, Clarification of When Products Made or Derived from Tobacco Are Regulated as Drugs, Devices, or Combination Products; Amendments to Regulations Regarding "Intended Uses"4 (published January 9, 2017, available here).

These documents follow recent case law that has eroded FDA's authority to prohibit truthful and nonmisleading "off-label" communications, and ongoing requests from industry for greater guidance on the scope of permissible communications. Taken together, FDA appears intent on preserving its enforcement authority over off-label promotion.

With its pair of draft guidance documents, FDA slightly broadens the scope of permissible communications related to approved or cleared medical products, and the sharing of health care economic information (HCEI) relating to approved or cleared medical products and unapproved medical products, such as investigational new drugs and devices.

At the same time, FDA firmly defends its authority to prohibit off-label promotion under First Amendment jurisprudence (in the memorandum and in the preamble to the final rule).

These documents are described in greater detail below.

Consistent Communications Draft Guidance

Through a series of questions and answers, the Draft Guidance describes FDA's current thinking regarding dissemination of information not appearing on FDA-required labeling, which includes the FDA-reviewed labeling on approved products and adequate directions for use and other information appearing on the labels of cleared devices. As applied to devices, this Draft Guidance applies to labeling required for products for which FDA permits marketing through premarket approval, 510(k), de novo classification or Humanitarian Device Exemption pathways, and to devices that are exempt from premarket notification.5 The Draft Guidance applies to human and animal drugs, biologics and medical devices. The Draft Guidance does not address considerations relating to the approval of generic drugs and biosimilars in determining whether proposed labeling has been previously approved for the reference product, and it presumably does not apply to lawfully compounded drugs. Specifically, the Draft Guidance describes the types of off-label information that manufacturers may and may not convey in compliance with the legal requirement that such information be truthful and not misleading. FDA explains that providing information outside the FDA-required labeling will not, alone, be considered evidence of a new intended use (in violation of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) § 502(f)), so long as the information is "consistent" with the FDA-required labeling.6 The Draft Guidance outlines the factors FDA will use to determine whether information is consistent for purposes of this analysis. Under the Draft Guidance, a communication is only "consistent" with the FDA-required labeling if it meets all of the following factors:7

  • Comparison to conditions of use in the required labeling: Representations must not relate to a different indication; patient population; directions for handling/preparing/use; or recommended dosage, strength or route of administration from the required labeling.
  • Potential to harm health: Representations must not alter the risk-benefit profile in any way that could result in increased harm to health.
  • Comparison to directions for use: The directions for use must enable the product to be used safely and effectively under the conditions described in the representation.

Following these vague and somewhat overlapping factors, FDA provides examples of communications that pass the test of consistency, including information

  • based on a comparison of the safety or efficacy of a medical product for its approved/cleared indication to another medical product approved/cleared for the same indication
  • that provides additional context about the adverse reactions associated with an approved/cleared medical product
  • about the onset of action of the product for its approved/cleared indication and dosing/use regimen
  • about the long-term safety and/or efficacy of products that are approved/cleared for chronic use (e.g., a firm could share data showing persistent safety and efficacy over an 18-month period for a product approved/cleared based on a 24-week study)
  • about the effects or use of a product in specific patient subgroups that are included in its approved/cleared patient population
  • concerning the effects of a product that comes directly from the patient (i.e., patient-reported outcomes) when the product is used for its FDA-approved/cleared indication and patient population
  • concerning product convenience
  • that provides additional context about the mechanism of action described in the FDA-required labeling.8

Some of these examples appear to signal a slight thawing in FDA's approach to communications made related to drugs, particularly with respect to information about longer-term safety and efficacy, specific patient subgroups, patient-reported outcomes and mechanism of action.

The agency also offers examples of communications that would run afoul of these factors. FDA would not consider information about the use of a product to treat a different disease or condition; a different patient population; or a different stage, severity or manifestation of a disease to be consistent with required labeling. The same goes for information that differs from the required labeling about the strength, dosage or regimen, route of administration or use as a monotherapy (versus adjunct use).

In addition, these Q&As set forth FDA's expectations regarding the appropriate context of scientific data used to communicate information that exceeds the scope of the required labeling. For the information to be considered truthful and not misleading, manufacturers should communicate only "scientifically appropriate and statistically sound" information and should disclose material limitations of referenced studies, including those relating to strength, power, and generalizability. The bar for demonstrating "scientifically appropriate and statistically sound" information is seemingly lower than that for FDA's "substantial evidence" standard.9 FDA will not consider communications that otherwise qualify as "consistent" to be false or misleading solely because the firm cannot offer evidence that would meet the applicable approval/clearance standard.10 The agency reasons that the product would have already met the safety and effectiveness standard for approval/clearance—and these communications would be "consistent" with that approval/clearance. However, FDA still reserves the right to find such a communication to be false or misleading for other reasons. The Draft Guidance also notes that off-label communications must comport with other provisions of the FDCA, Public Health Service Act and other applicable regulations.

Comments must be submitted by April 19, 2017.

Payor Communications Draft Guidance

This Draft Guidance describes FDA's current thinking regarding medical product manufacturers' communication of HCEI to payors (e.g., health insurance companies); formulary committees (e.g., pharmacy and therapeutics committees); drug information centers; technology assessment bodies, and other entities that make drug selection, coverage and reimbursement decisions on a population basis. Communications to individual health care providers/prescribers and consumers are not contemplated under the Draft Guidance.11

FDA does not limit the methods for communicating competent and reliable scientific evidence (CARSE), which could be conveyed in an evidence dossier, journal reprint, software, budget model or another form.12 The CARSE standard applies to all HCEI, including inputs and assumptions relating to both clinical outcomes and economic consequences.13 To ensure that it is not misleading, HCEI should be developed using generally accepted scientific standards. Specifically, communications to payor entities should include clear information about study design and methodology, such as the type of analysis, modeling, patient population, perspective, treatment comparator, time horizon, cost estimates and assumptions; any factors that limit its generalizability; limitations that affect interpretability or reliability of the analysis; sensitivity analysis; and additional information to ensure balance, including sharing the FDA-approved labeling itself and prominent statements describing material differences from approved labeling, disclosure of any omitted studies or data sources, risk information related to clinical assumptions, and disclosure of any potential financial or affiliation biases.14

The FDCA, which was amended by Section 3037 of the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114-255), requires that HCEI relate to an approved indication, and the Draft Guidance provides examples of information that would—and would not—satisfy this requirement. FDA considers HCEI to relate to an approved indication if it is consistent with the approved duration of treatment and approved dosage forms and strengths. However, HCEI may relate to effects within study subgroups not included on the labeling, effects in practice settings other than those studied and effects on validated surrogate endpoints, as well as impact on hospital stays, clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) and overall burden of illness.15 FDA reminds firms that HCEI disseminated in accordance with the statutory allowance for HCEI (in Section 502(a) of the FDCA) constitutes promotion and is thus subject to requirements for submission of promotional materials, including the postmarketing requirement to submit such materials to FDA at the time of initial dissemination.16 Responding to unsolicited requests from payor entities regarding off-label uses of approved products is not addressed in this Draft Guidance, but is the subject of prior guidance.

This Draft Guidance also addresses the communication of HCEI relating to unapproved medical products, such as investigational drugs and devices. Because payor entities must plan for, and make, coverage and payment decisions in advance, FDA will not object to manufacturers sharing certain truthful and nonmisleading HCEI regarding unapproved, investigational products. When it comports with the aforementioned CARSE standards for complete and balanced scientific information, firms may share product information (e.g., drug class, device design); indication and patient population being studied; objective results of clinical/preclinical studies; anticipated timeline of FDA review; and product pricing information and related programs (e.g., patient assistance programs).17 In addition, such communications should include a clear statement that the product is under investigation, as well as the stage of product development (e.g., clinical trial phase); should not make any representations regarding safety or effectiveness; and may be made to only appropriate HCEI audiences, not to individual providers. Finally, the agency suggests that firms update previously shared HCEI once it becomes outdated.18

Comments must be submitted by April 19, 2017.

Memorandum on Communications and the First Amendment

On January 18, 2017, FDA released a memorandum, Public Health Interests and First Amendment Considerations Related to Manufacturer Communications Regarding Unapproved Uses of Approved or Cleared Medical Products reasserting its position that regulation of off-label promotion is permissible under the First Amendment, even in light of recent jurisprudence limiting its authority. FDA held a two-day public hearing in November 2016 to address its authority to regulate communications regarding unapproved uses of approved or cleared medical products, and solicited comment on the issue. In an apparent response to comments that FDA did not sufficiently discuss the First Amendment in the notice for the public hearing, FDA reopened the comment period to publish this Memorandum.19 The agency seeks public comment on how best to reconcile the interests of public health and safety with First Amendment jurisprudence.

FDA dedicates a considerable portion of the 60-page Memorandum to establishing the legal background and discussing the competing public health interests at stake. FDA identifies seven public health interests advanced by its policies, including preventing public harm, motivating the development of robust scientific data, limiting diversion of health care resources toward ineffective treatments, protecting the integrity and reliability of promotional information, and maintaining incentives for clinical trial participation. The Memorandum lists only two public health interests supported by allowing broad discussion of unapproved uses for approved products: supporting informed decisionmaking for patient treatment and furthering scientific research.20

FDA also defends its legal authority to use communications made by firms as evidence of a product's intended use, despite the recent series of federal court cases that have signaled increased latitude for firms to promote off-label uses on the basis that such statements are considered a protected form of speech. FDA seeks to narrow the holding in United States v. Caronia, in which the 2nd Circuit found that FDA could not prohibit truthful and nonmisleading speech promoting an off-label use of an FDA-approved drug.21 Caronia set the stage for Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. United States, in which a New York district court held that Caronia foreclosed reliance on truthful and nonmisleading speech alone as serving as evidence of intended use for purposes of a misbranding action.22 FDA asserts that Caronia does not actually limit the agency's enforcement reach because the 2nd Circuit has since written in dicta that "Caronia left open the government's ability to prove misbranding on a theory that promotional speech provides evidence that a drug is intended for a use that is not included on the drug's FDA-approved label."23

The agency also details its contention that it may regulate speech under the framework set forth in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission, which lays out a four-part test for determining whether restrictions on commercial speech violate the First Amendment.24 Under Central Hudson, if commercial speech is truthful or "potentially misleading" (i.e., not proven to be misleading), the government may still impose restrictions on the speech if the restrictions advance a "substantial" government interest and are no "more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest."25 FDA asserts that the court in Caronia did not consider all of the public health interests advanced by FDA's approach, and it notes that the court did not have the benefit of considering a recent Canadian study showing an association between unapproved uses and adverse drug events.26 Because FDA's interest in promoting public health is "substantial," the agency contends that it could restrict even truthful and not inherently misleading speech under this framework. Nonetheless, FDA seeks public comment on these restrictions.

After presenting its position on why its current approach is consistent with case law, FDA identifies alternative approaches to addressing off-label promotion. FDA ultimately rejects all of the alternatives because "none of them appear to integrate the complex mix of numerous, and sometimes competing, interests at play and thus do not advance those multiple interests."27 They include prohibiting altogether the use and/or prescribing of an approved/cleared medical product for an unapproved use, barring approval of generics and other affected products until all periods of exclusivity on the reference product have expired, limiting Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement to approved uses, allowing firms to actively promote an unapproved use as long as they disclose that the use is unapproved and include other appropriate warnings, educating health care providers and patients to differentiate false and misleading promotion from truthful and nonmisleading information, taxing firms more heavily for sales of products for unapproved uses than for approved uses, permitting promotion of unapproved uses listed in medical compendia and limiting evidence that could be considered relevant to intended use to speech that the government can prove is false or misleading.

Although FDA did not find any of these alternatives suitable, the agency purportedly continues to re-examine its position relating to firm communications regarding unapproved uses of approved/cleared medical products and seeks public comment on these proposals.

Comments must be submitted by April 19, 2017.

Final Rule on Definition of "Intended Uses"

On January 9, 2017, FDA published a final rule, Clarification of When Products Made or Derived from Tobacco Are Regulated as Drugs, Devices, or Combination Products; Amendments to Regulations Regarding "Intended Uses" which amends the definition of "intended use" for purposes of drugs (21 C.F.R. § 201.128) and devices (§ 801.4).28 The actual revisions to the regulatory text do not reflect a change in FDA policy; instead, FDA is updating the regulations to reflect how it currently applies its policies.29 Although the bulk of the Final Rule focuses on products derived from tobacco, FDA makes clear that these changes apply to all drugs and devices. The agency is revising these regulatory definitions to clarify that the agency does not, "absent extraordinary circumstances, . . . regard a firm as intending an unapproved new use for an approved or cleared medical product based solely on that firm's knowledge that the product was being prescribed or used by doctors for such use."30 However, FDA will examine all relevant evidence in determining whether a firm has established a new intended use, which may include the firm's knowledge that health care providers are prescribing or using its approved/cleared medical product for an unapproved use.31 In making this clarification, FDA re-emphasizes its position that the agency may look to any relevant source in determining a product's new intended use. FDA also explains in the preamble that sources of evidence are not limited to published marketing materials, but also include internal documents and circumstances surrounding the sale of products.32 In addition, FDA noted that several commenters urged FDA to confirm that truthful and nonmisleading speech cannot form the basis of a firm's intended use of a medical product, based on the holding in Caronia. FDA responded that it is in the process of re-examining these policies (and separately released the Memorandum described above a week later). Nevertheless, FDA asserted its legal authority to look to any relevant source of information as evidence of a new intended use, supported by much of the same legal analysis and discussion presented in the Memorandum.

****

Given the timing and the depth of FDA's legal analysis in both the Memorandum and the preamble of the Final Rule, the agency is making a concerted effort to defend its role in regulating off-label communications and, by extension, the centrality of the premarket review of intended uses of medical products. Meanwhile, FDA does loosen the reins on permissible communications in its two draft guidances, if only very slightly.

These policies, and the extent of their enforcement, could change under new FDA leadership, and the Trump administration has already taken steps to allow for reconsideration of policies issued under the Obama administration. On January 20, 2017, the Trump administration issued a Presidential Memorandum, available here, that instructs heads of executive departments and agencies not to send new rules or guidances to the Office of the Federal Register until a Trump-designated agency head reviews and approves them. The draft guidances and the Memorandum have already been published in the Federal Register, so comments may still be submitted; it will be up to the Trump administration to determine whether to withdraw the drafts or consider the comments. In addition, the effective dates for regulations that have been published, but have not taken effect, are to be temporarily postponed for 60 days from January 20, after which the agency/department may "consider potentially proposing further notice-and-comment rulemaking" and consult with the Office of Management and Budget Director if further action is appropriate. The Final Rule described above, which had an effective date of February 8, 2017, falls within this category, and the new effective date may now be delayed pending the administration's review.

Footnotes

1. FDA, Draft Guidance, Medical Product Communications That Are Consistent with the FDA-Required Labeling – Questions and Answers (Jan. 18, 2017), available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM537130.pdf (hereinafter "Consistent Communications Draft Guidance").

2. FDA, Draft Guidance, Drug and Device Manufacturer Communications with Payors, Formulary Committees, and Similar Entities – Questions and Answers (Jan. 18, 2017), available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM537347.pdf (hereinafter "Payor Communications Draft Guidance").

3. Memorandum, Public Health Interests and First Amendment Considerations Related to Manufacturer Communications Regarding Unapproved Uses of Approved or Cleared Medical Products (Jan. 19, 2017), available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FDA-2016-N-1149-0040 (hereinafter "Memorandum").

4. Final Rule, Clarification of When Products Made or Derived from Tobacco Are Regulated as Drugs, Devices, or Combination Products; Amendments to Regulations Regarding "Intended Uses," 82 Fed. Reg. 2,193 (Jan. 9, 2017), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-09/pdf/2016-31950.pdf (hereinafter "Final Rule").

5. Consistent Communications Draft Guidance, at 1 n.4.

6. Id. at 3.

7. Id. at 3–5.

8. Consistent Communications Draft Guidance,at 6–7.

9. Id. at 7; see U.S.C. §§ 355(d); 21 C.F.R. § 202.1(e)(6)–(7).

10. Consistent Communications Draft Guidance, at 9.

11. Communications with Payors Draft Guidance, at 4–5.

12. Id.

13. Id. at 9.

14. Id. at 9–12.

15. Id. at 6–8.

16. Id. at 14-15 (referencing the standards codified at 21 CF.R. § 314.81(b)(3)(i), inter alia).

17. Communications with Payors Draft Guidance, at 16.

18. Id. at 16–17.

19. Memorandum, at 1.

20. Id. at 17–8.

21. 703 F.3d 149, 157 (2d Cir. 2012).

22. Amarin Pharms., Inc. v. United States, 119 F. Supp. 3d 196, 235-36 (S.D.N.Y. 2015).

23. Memorandum, at 22 (quoting United States ex rel. Polansky v. Pfizer, Inc., 822 F.3d 613, 615 n.2 (2d Cir. 2016)).

24. Memorandum, at 23.

25. Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n, 447 U.S. 557, 566 (1980).

26. Memorandum, at 23-4.

27. Id. at 26.

28. 82 Fed. Reg. 2,193 (Jan. 9, 2017), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-09/pdf/2016-31950.pdf (referencing 21 C.F.R. §§ 201.128 & 801.4).

29. Id. at 2,194.

30. Id. at 2,204.

31. Id. at 2,206.

32. Id. at 2,208.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions