One of the remedies available to a patent holder against a patent infringer is an injunction to prevent future. Two types are generally available: a preliminary injunction and an injunction in proceedings on the merits. A preliminary injunction is a provisional measures which has to be confirmed in merits proceedings or otherwise ceases to have effect. In European patent law a (provisional) cross-border injunction is possible: a court in one European state can prohibit infringement in several other European states.
Jurisdiction of Article 6 (1) BR against Co-Defendants [each infringing all national parts of EP] affirmed;
Jurisdiction according to Art. 31 BR affirmed for cross-border provisional injunctions despite nullity pleas
The Paris Court of Appeal clarified the conditions to be assessed by the Court in order to grant an interlocutory injunction pursuant to Article L. 615-3 of the French Intellectual Property Code. A summary of this case will be posted on http://www.KluwerIPCases.com
The presentation of a product at an exhibition within Germany, constitutes use of the shape of the product (protected by trademark law) in the course of trade for advertising purposes, and this is therefore no “offering” or “putting on the market” that product in Germany . Rather, evidence must be provided which shows that the…
In a decision of 21 March 2012, the Cour d’Appel of Paris ruled on the issue of the appraisal which the French judge has to make when a request for a preliminary injunction against acts allegedly infringing a patent or an SPC is referred to him. Novartis AG is the holder and SAS Novartis Pharma is the…
For many years in Denmark, interlocutory injunction proceedings have been organized under the aegis of the bailiff’s department of the municipal courts. This has entailed a number of disadvantages, not least in relation to patent cases. In most other countries it is considered a necessary pre-requisite that the presiding judge in such proceedings has experience…
One of the most controversial provisions of the Spanish Patents Act is article 137.2, which states “Where the measures requested involve restrictions on the defendant’s industrial or commercial activity, the judge shall, when deciding with respect thereto, fix the amount of the security by which the said defendant may at any time substitute the effectiveness…
Merck Sharp Dohme Corp. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Teva Pharma B.V. and Teva UK limited On 15 March 2012, the High Court in England and Wales delivered some useful guidance on when a patentee can obtain an interim injunction in a pharmaceutical patent infringement action. The case was Merck Sharp Dohme Corp. and…
On the defendant’s side, knowing what the patent dispute is all about is essential for your strategy. Not only do you need to adjust your non-infringement arguments to the plaintiff’s assertions concerning how the features of the claim are fulfilled in the attacked embodiment. Even more importantly, the scope of an infringement verdict is determined…
An article in the well-known IP magazine GRUR last year carried the heading “Do exhibitors at trade fairs in Germany enjoy immunity from the courts?” The author came to the conclusion that this question had to be answered in the affirmative after he had read the Federal Court of Justice decision “Pralinenform II” (a trademark…
On 10 February 2012 the Spanish Court handed down a judgment where it accepted for the first time the concept of a “springboard” injunction as a remedy aimed at curing acts of infringement carried out before a patent expires. The background to the case may be summarised as follows: A manufacturer of generic drugs filed…
