In a decision rendered on 12 June 2024, the full chamber of the private law division (‘Segunda Seção’) of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice ruled that state courts may decide on the validity of patents when the validity is put in issue by way of defence in civil proceedings for infringement (EREsp 1.332.417/RS). The…
Background In June 2024, we reported that in an application for provisional measures brought by Abbott Diabetes Care against Sibio Technology, The Hague Local Division (“LD”) determined, inter alia, that it had competence for Ireland, in the sense that it could grant a PI extending to Ireland under European patent validated in that country. In…
A recent decision from Joanna Smith J dealing with the costs of a withdrawn application in a case before the English Patents Court contains an important postscript and suggests that the rules in the Patents Court Guide regarding the lodging and filing of skeleton arguments need to be revisited. All English patent litigators, and many…
On 15 July 2024, the High Court of England and Wales handed down its decision ([2024] EWHC 1815 (Ch)) in the jurisdiction challenge in Telsa’s case against InterDigital and Avanci which considers a request for declaratory relief in relation to the FRAND terms for a patent pool licence that includes SEPs owned by multiple proprietors. …
In June 2023, the UPC – at the Düsseldorf Local Division – granted its first ex parte provisional injunction (“PI”) in myStromer AG v Revolt Zycling AG (“myStromer v Revolt”), despite the defendant having previously filed a protective letter. A year on from that decision, and with only one other ex parte PI decision having…
The recent rivaroxaban PI cases may have caused you to ask yourself whether the American Cynamid principles for determining whether or not to grant preliminary injunctive relief in the UK are dead or at least dying. In this article we consider the facts of the rivaroxaban PI applications and aim to tease out some principles…
It has been about a year since the UPC issued its first PI decision, making it a good time to reflect on the case law created so far. The year has seen PI applications being made in front of a range of Local Divisions, including Düsseldorf, The Hague, Helsinki, Vienna, and Hamburg, with most determined…
On 3 June 2024, the UPC’s Hamburg Local Division rejected a PI application against UEFA (Union des Associations Européennes de Football) and Kinexon GmBH (a technology partner) in regard to the use of video-assistance referee (VAR) technology at the upcoming European Championship in Germany. The application for preliminary relief concerned EP 1 944 067 (EP…
On 28 May 2024, the UPC Court of Appeal (in decision UPC_CoA_22/2024) upheld a decision of the Court of First Instance, Central Division (Paris Seat) not to stay revocation proceedings before the UPC pending parallel opposition proceedings before the EPO concerning the same patent. Following previous Court of Appeal decisions, this non-technical appeal was adjudicated…
During the 12 months since the UPC first opened its doors for business, court users across Europe have been studying the decisions that have been emerging from the various divisions in order to understand the practical application of the Rules of Procedure and the approach of the various judges of the courts. This in turn…
