18.11.2025

Pharmaceutical Entrepreneurs vs. Contract Manufacturers: Who (real-ly) bears the risk of liability under Section 84 of the German Medicines Act (AMG)?

Pharmazeutische Unternehmer vs. Lohnhersteller: Wer trägt (wirklich) das Risiko der Haftung nach § 84 AMG

According to Section 84 of the German Medicines Act (AMG), the pharmaceutical entrepre-neur is liable for damages caused by a medicinal product placed on the market. However, contract manufacturers are increasingly pressured by contractual agreements to assume the liability risk under Section 84 AMG. Considering the distribution of economic benefits, this is not appropriate. It is primarily pharmaceutical entrepreneurs that benefit economically from medicinal products (sales, market position) and should therefore bear the main responsibility for risks. This article ex-plains the terms "pharmaceutical entrepreneur" and "contract manufacturer", the scope of liability under Section 84 AMG and the hedging of liability risks under Section 84 AMG.

Understanding Roles: Pharmaceutical Entrepreneur vs. Contract Manufacturer

According to Section 4 (18) AMG, a pharmaceutical entrepreneur is any entity that holds the marketing authorization or registration for a medicinal product or places medicines on the market under their own name. The pharmaceutical entrepreneur controls the marketing of the medicinal product and is responsible for its quality. The contract manufacturer, on the other hand, produces the medicinal product according to the specifications of the pharmaceutical entrepreneur, i.e. does not operate under its own name and does not hold a marketing authorization. The contract manufacturer therefore legally cannot be a pharmaceutical entrepreneur.

This understanding of roles is crucial for the attribution of liability under Section 84 AMG. The pharmaceutical entrepreneur (and not the contract manufacturer) is responsible externally towards the patient or end consumer. They have market power and decide how the medicinal product is manufactured by the contract manufacturer. Therefore, the pharmaceutical entrepreneur also bears the liability risk.

Strict Liability under Section 84 AMG

Liability under Section 84 AMG is strict liability. This means that the pharmaceutical entrepreneur is liable for any damage caused by a human medicinal product placed on the market by the pharmaceutical company, regardless of whether it is at fault (negligence or intent). The liability includes personal injuries such as harm or death resulting from the use of the medicinal product.

 

Pharma Pool Insurance – a Protective Shield for Pharmaceutical Entrepreneurs

Pharmaceutical entrepreneurs are obliged to secure insurance coverage for potential claims arising from Section 84 AMG, see Section 94 AMG. This coverage can be provided only in two ways: (1) by taking out sufficient liability insurance or (2) by means of an indemnity or warranty obligation from a credit institution. The minimum cover must correspond to the amounts specified in Section 88 sentence 1 AMG, i.e. at least €120 million per claim. In practice, due to the high sums involved, cover is provided almost exclusively through insurance contracts and only rarely through banks/credit institutions.

Most pharmaceutical entrepreneurs  join together to form reinsurance pools, known as pharma pools. The pharma pools combine coverage amounts and thus enable particularly strong protection against claims for damages that could threaten the existence of individual companies. 

Shifting the Liability Risk to Contract Manufacturers through Contractual Arrangements

From a business perspective, it is understandable that pharmaceutical entrepreneurs  want to shift their liability risks internally to contract manufacturers. As a rule, extensive indemnification obligations and unlimited liability for all claims are demanded. However, this effective assumption of liability under Section 84 AMG is existentially threatening for contract manufacturers. Unlike pharmaceutical companies, contract manufacturers are not members of these pharma pools, which significantly weakens their protection in the event of damage.

Contract manufacturers therefore do not have comparable insurance coverage. Usually, contract manufacturers agree on coverage amounts of € 10 million or € 20 million annually with insurers.

Conclusion

For contract manufacturers, it is particularly crucial to limit their liability at least in amount through contractual liability caps. Unlimited liability and the effective assumption of liability risks under Section 84 AMG are hardly feasible from an insurance perspective and economically unsustainable. Moreover, such an assumption does not correspond to the clear legislative intent.

Author
Anne Biebler

Anne Biebler
Partner
Leipzig
anne.biebler@luther-lawfirm.com
+49 341 5299 21145