In a detailed and impeccably written decision, the Madrid Court of Appeal (Section 32) has ruled in the raloxifene case, awarding damages in the high seven figure region. This is a landmark decision which is likely to shape patent infringement claims and damage quantification, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector. The decision has important implications for…
On 23 June 2023, the Madrid Appeal Court (Section 32) published one of the most interesting judgments coming from Spanish courts during the last few years. The first point of interest is that this is one of the first judgments handed down by the brand new “Section 32” of the Madrid Appeal Court, recently established…
In a technically complex infringement case, Barcelona Commercial Court no. 1 establishes ad hoc procedural rules for quantification of damages at the enforcement stage. This sheds light on the procedure applicable to follow-on damage quantification proceedings, which are a critical element of enforcement strategy. As such, this case has caught the attention of Spanish patent…
As explained in our entry UPC: four reasons why the PPA is not legally in force, published on April 21, 2022, one of the collateral damages of Brexit is that the conditions for the entry into force of the “Protocol to the Agreement on a UPC on Provisional Application” (the “PPA”), which included the ratification…
As readers are well aware, Directive 2004/48 EC (known as the “Enforcement Directive”), stemming from Part III of the TRIPS Agreement, was meant to introduce a minimum level of intellectual property protection throughout the European Union. For example, article 13 establishes that Member States must guarantee that judicial authorities can order the party found to…
The Spanish Supreme Court rules in a patent ownership and trade secret dispute where a company had filed a patent application which named as inventor the husband of the company’s founder, who had previously led an R&D project funded by a competitor. The Court sets a high standard for ownership claims and, at the same…
To date, final decisions from the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office (“SPTO”) dealing with matters such as patents or supplementary protection certificates (“SPC”) may be appealed before the administrative law chamber of what are known as the Tribunales Superiores de Justicia (“High Courts of Justice”). Although these Courts are highly specialised in public law matters,…
As readers will be well aware, one of the points on which the courts of various European countries diverge, is whether or not the prosecution history of the patent at hand may be taken into account to interpret its scope of protection. For example, the UK Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment of 12 July…
Barcelona Commercial Court no. 5 – arguably Spain’s most active patent court – rules in an infringement case concerning motorcycle helmets. The features of a claim cannot be narrowed down based on a preferred embodiment represented in one of the drawings. While probably not a watershed case, this precedent should be considered in future disputes…
In a complex case concerning blockbuster cinacalcet, Section 15 of the Barcelona Court of Appeals makes findings on the non-obviousness of inventions consisting of the provision of an unexpected technical effect. In these cases, the technical problem can be reformulated as providing such effect, provided that it is related to the problem initially disclosed in…
