2.4.0.82119100 - Disclosure - Arbitration Award (Notes)truefalsefalse1false falsefalseD2013Q2YTDhttp://www.sec.gov/CIK0001113481duration2013-01-01T00:00:002013-06-30T00:00:001true 1us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstractus-gaap_truenadurationfalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse1falsefalsefalse00falsefalsefalsexbrli:stringItemTypestringfalse0Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]2false 2us-gaap_LegalMattersAndContingenciesTextBlockus-gaap_truenadurationfalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalseterseLabel1falsefalsefalse00<div style="font-family:Times New Roman;font-size:10pt;"><div style="line-height:120%;text-indent:18px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;font-weight:bold;">Arbitration Award</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:18px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">The Company received a Demand for Arbitration filed by Eagle Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Eagle) dated October 25, 2011. In the Demand for Arbitration, Eagle claimed that the Company had failed to meet its obligations under the license and development agreement between the Company, Eagle and certain other parties relating to the development of a new formulation of Angiomax, and to the Company's efforts to seek and obtain regulatory approval, market and sell that new formulation. As a result, Eagle alleged that it was damaged in an amount it believed exceeded </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$306.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">. In January 2013, an arbitration hearing took place before a </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">three</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> person panel. In February 2013, the Company and Eagle submitted post-hearing briefs, and, in April 2013, post-hearing arguments took place. On July 19, 2013, the Company received the final award determination from the </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">three</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> person arbitration panel deciding the matter, which directed that the Company pay Eagle </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$5.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> and denied the remainder of Eagle's claims for </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$306.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> in damages. The Company accrued for the </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$5.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> award in the three months ended </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">June&#160;30, 2013</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> and expects to pay the award to Eagle in the third quarter of 2013.</font></div></div>falsefalsefalsenonnum:textBlockItemTypenaThe entire disclosure for legal proceedings, legal contingencies, litigation, regulatory and environmental matters and other contingencies.No definition available.false0Arbitration AwardfalseArbitration Award (Notes)UnKnownUnKnownUnKnownUnKnowntruefalsefalseNoteshttp://www.themedicinescompany.com/role/ArbitrationAwardNotes12