The Constitutional Implications of the EU Patent

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Patent Litigation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Council Decision ◽  
Unitary Patent ◽  
The Eu

Council Decision of March 2011 to authorize enhanced co-operation as regards unitary patent protection – Proposed Regulations implementing enhanced co-operation in this area – Proposed treaty concerning patent litigation – Challenges to the validity of the decision authorizing enhanced co-operation – Incompatibility of the patent litigation treaty with EU law – EU external competence concerning intellectual property and civil jurisdiction issues

Subject matter

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Keussen
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Council Decision ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Unitary Patent ◽  
The Eu

Council Decision of 10 March 2011 2011/167/EU was a culminating point in the long-standing dispute described in the Introduction relating to the creation of unitary IP rights in the EU. In its only Article, it authorizes 25 MSs of the EU (all MSs at the time of the Decision with the exception of Spain and Italy) to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection.

scholarly journals Enhanced Cooperation and Free Movement. Territorial Aspects of ‘Harmonisation’

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 249-267
Author(s):  
Miłosz Malaga ◽  
Anna Wilińska-Zelek
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Unitary Patent

In this article we examine the notion of ‘harmonisation’ in its interplay with the application of provisions on the free movement of goods. Due to the introduction of the European unitary patent protection system, we are witnessing the first cases of adopting enhanced cooperation in the internal market. This fact raises new, systemic questions concerning the concept of ‘harmonisation’ in European Union law. Are only legal, substantive aspects covered by its definition or should the territorial range of a legal act be taken into account? If yes – to what extent? Since the adoption of enhanced cooperation covers the field of intellectual property rights, the above questions concern the relationship between exercising those rights on the one hand and the principle of free movement on the other. A closer look at this matter leads to the conclusion that the unitary patent might not provide the solution to one of the problems that created for. More generally, in this article we conclude that when defining the concept of ‘harmonisation’, one should take its territorial scope into account narrowly, so as not to infringe the principles of EU law.

scholarly journals Goods in Transit and Intellectual Property Under the EU Law and Caselaw of the Court of Justice

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-104
Author(s):  
Radim Charvát
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
In Transit ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The paper addresses the issue whether customs authorities of Member States are entitled to suspend or detain goods in transit (i.e., products directing from one non- Member State to another non-Member State through the EU) and the evolving case-law of the Court of Justice related to this matter. Prior to the judgment in Philips and Nokia cases, a so-called manufacturing fiction theory was applied by some Member State courts (especially Dutch courts). According to this theory, goods suspended or detained by customs authorities within the EU were considered to be manufactured in the Member State where the custom action took place. In the Philips and Nokia judgments, the Court of Justice rejected this manufacturing fiction theory. But the proposal for amendment to the Regulation on Community trade mark and the proposal of the new Trademark directive, as a part of the trademark reform within the EU, go directly against the ruling in the Philips and Nokia cases and against the Understanding between the EU and India.

scholarly journals From the Unitary Patent Package to a Federal EU Patent Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-146
Author(s):  
Juliana Almeida ◽  
Guilherme Oliveira e Costa
Keyword(s):  
Patent Protection ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Cooperation Mechanism ◽  
Unitary Patent ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Scientific And Technological Development

Abstract For the last forty years, the European Union has been pursuing the goal of a unified system of patent law, which would make it possible for an invention to be protected, by EU law, throughout the territory of the Member-States, with a single application. This would simplify the patent protection system, making it easier, less costly and more secure, and would facilitate access to the internal market and promote scientific and technological development. However, problems might arise because of the plurality of legal sources that could be involved and due to the fact that not all countries want to be part of this new system. Nevertheless, the involvement of the majority of the Member-States in the Unitary Patent Package, through participating in an international agreement and in using the EU’s enhanced cooperation mechanism, is evidence of federalist manifestations of the EU as a sui generis organisation.

Growth companies and procedural safeguards in European patent litigation

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista Rantasaari
Keyword(s):  
Patent Protection ◽  
Patent System ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Court System ◽  
Patent Litigation ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Unified Patent Court ◽  
Procedural Safeguards ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
Unitary Patent

The unitary patent system with the establishment of the Unified Patent Court will lead to unitary patent protection covering most European Union countries. Moreover, it will lead to litigation with the same geographical reach. One potential concern related to increasing litigation is the so-called ‘patent trolls’ (non-practicing entities) that purchase patents for the purpose of portfolio building or company financing. One of the key expressed justifications of the unitary patent system was to support small- and medium-sized enterprises by securing them easier and wider access to patents. The aim of this article is to examine procedural safeguards from the perspective of the start-up and growth companies. These safeguards protect start-up and growth companies when acting as defendants. As a corollary, they weaken the enforcement mechanisms from the perspective of the plaintiff. The safeguards addressed in this article are fee shifting, preliminary injunctions, and bifurcation. As the Unified Patent Court system is still evolving, the current state of European patent litigation in key jurisdiction countries (Germany, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands) is analysed. This article explores how these safeguards evolve in the unitary patent regime and their potential to reduce uncertainty for start-up and growth companies when acting as defendants.

Towards a New Form of EU Law?: The Use of EU Institutions outside the EU Legal Framework

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Financial Assistance ◽  
Economic And Monetary Union ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Patent Litigation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
New Form ◽  
The Eu

Economic governance – Financial assistance – Economic and monetary union – Patent litigation – Treaties between member states – Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice – powers of the EU institutions – Enhanced cooperation

scholarly journals Enhanced Cooperation - the New Trend of the EU Development

2014 ◽  
pp. 148-154
Author(s):  
L. O. Babynina
Keyword(s):  
Patent Protection ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Optimal Balance ◽  
European Public ◽  
Extreme Measure ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Transaction Tax ◽  
Unitary Patent ◽  
The Eu

The article is dedicated to implementation of the enhanced cooperation in the EU. Actually two such projects are шn progress (the law applicable to divorce and legal separation and unitary patent protection) and other two are under discussionffmandai transaction tax and European Public Prosecutor's Office). Active use of the enhanced cooperation recently shows that such kind of the promoting integration is more and more required in the EU. However its implementation can jeopardize the principles of the EU functioning and undermine the status of the institutions in the integration process. This mechanism can also be used in order to exclude the discordant states from integration process instead of traditional search of compromises. This argument is based on analysis of the implementation conditions of the project on the unitary patent protection. At the same time the projects of the enhanced cooperation obviously make the interaction in different spheres more efficient. In addition they can be used for testing the new types of cooperation. That's why the search for an optimal balance between promotion integration through the mechanism of enhanced cooperation and preserving the unity of the EU should be considered as main goal by participants of the integration process. Otherwise the gradual separation on the vanguard group may lead to EU division. Nevertheless taking into consideration enlargement of the EU and its diversity, the enhanced cooperation Should be used onlyas "extreme measure".

The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Western Europe

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Seville
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Middle Ages ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Cultural Development ◽  
Property Law ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
The World ◽  
Ip Law ◽  
Unitary Patent ◽  
The Eu

This chapter surveys the emergence and development of Intellectual Property (IP) law in Continental Europe and Britain. The story begins largely in the middle ages with the grant of territorially-confined inventors’ and printers’ privileges, and traces the development of these privileges into the four main species of IP rights recognized throughout the world today. A key theme is the varied national histories that underpin the development of each IP right even within the geographical confines and relative social and political homogeneity of Western Europe, and the extent of modern IP law’s embeddedness in the industrial and cultural development of individual states. The chapter ends with an account of the emergence of a European perspective on IP, as expressed in the nineteenth-century Paris and Berne Conventions, and its development by general and IP-specific European communities, including the EU, which has established unitary patent, trademark, and design rights for its Member States.

scholarly journals Protection of Indigenous or Traditional Knowledge Under Intellectual Property Laws: An Examination of the Efficacy of Copyright Law, Trade Secret and SUI Generis Rights

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Ogwezzy
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The article deals with the rules for a grant of interim measures in the context of EU law and its application in national judicial proceedings. It covers the key case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU related to the regime, conditions and limits of the interim measures and adds a reflection of practice of Czech courts. Article pays particular attention to the conditions for suspension ofn the application of national law measures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document