Application of competition law and the law relating to unfair competition

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winfried Tilmann
Keyword(s):  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Unfair Competition ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
A Company

The acquisition of an EPUE may be impermissible under competition law only in special exceptional cases. This conceivably might hold true where a recognizable strategy of obstruction (Art 102 TFEU) is pursued by a company holding a dominant position with the aim of walling in competitors, without such patent proprietor having any intention of using the subject matter of patent protection himself. Also conceivably falling under the heading of inadmissible obstruction is the acquisition of a large number of patents by which the acquiring entity pursues the aim not of exploiting them but instead of using such acquisition to its own competitive advantage. The acquisition of such IP rights used merely for blockading purposes may qualify as part of the aforementioned strategy of obstruction and as such violate Art 102 TFEU. This may make it impermissible to invoke the patent: the competitor affected can raise the objection of abuse of a dominant position, which the UPC is in the position to consider (Art 32(1)(a) UPCA). As a general rule, such violation does not give rise to an obligation of cancellation because, if held by others actually using it themselves, it may turn out that the patent is no longer ‘flawed’.

Does the Name of a Case Matter?

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-489
Author(s):  
Haris Jamil
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Fishing Vessel ◽  
International Commerce ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
A Company

Abstract The arbitral award in The “Enrica Lexie” Incident (Italy v. India) brings to the fore the issue of assigning a name to a case. To contextualise India’s contention regarding the name, The “Enrica Lexie” Incident, in this article, I outline the law and practice regarding assigning names to cases by different international judicial bodies (ICJ, ITLOS, WTO and PCA). Examining India’s objection to the name, I argue that the name of the case does not capture the subject matter of the dispute accurately and emanates from the mainstream view of international law. The name prioritises an Italian flagged vessel, owned by a company engaged in international commerce and navigating under the protection of the Italian navy, over a fishing vessel owned by private individuals. The name reinforces a state-centric view of international law in which the victims of the incident do not picture.

8. Patent Protection and Exploitation

2019 ◽  
pp. 178-198
Author(s):  
Justine Pila ◽  
Paul L.C. Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Central Importance ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Patent Grant

Once a European patent has been granted the nature and scope of the protection it confers must be determined. In considering such protection this chapter focuses on four issues of central importance to that end. The first is the effects of a patent, namely, the territories in and term for which it is valid. The second is the object of protection, namely, the subject matter that the public is excluded from using during the term of its protection. The third is the nature of protection, namely, the uses of the subject matter from which the public is excluded. And the fourth is the limitations to protection, namely, the uses of an invention that the law permits notwithstanding its protection by patent grant.

scholarly journals Intangible machines: Patent protection for software in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-37
Author(s):  
Brad Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Information Technology Industry ◽  
Technology Industry ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law

Intellectual property law has been interacting with software for over sixty years. Despite this, the law in this area remains confused and uncertain: this is particularly evident in patent law. Focusing on U.S. patent law from the 1960s through to the mid-1970s, this article argues that a key reason for this confusion relates to the particular way that the subject matter was construed. While the early discussions about subject matter eligibility were framed in terms of the question “is software patentable?”, what was really at stake in these debates was the preliminary ontological question: what is software? Building on work that highlights the competing ways that software was construed by different parts of the information technology industry at the time, the article looks at the particular way that the law responded to these competing interpretations and how in so doing it laid the foundation for the confusion that characterizes the area. When engaging with new types of subject matter, patent law has consistently relied on the relevant techno-scientific communities not only to provide the law with a relatively clear understanding of the nature of the subject matter being considered; they have also provided the means to allow the law to describe, demarcate, and identify that new subject matter. The inherently divided nature of the nascent information technology industry meant that this was not possible. As a result, the law was forced to develop its own way of dealing with the would-be subject matter.

Letter to the Editor

2002 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 192-192
Author(s):  
Ian Winspur
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Performing Arts ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Performing Arts Medicine ◽  
Letter To The Editor ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law

I enjoyed Alice Brandfonbrener’s editorial “But I Didn’t Ask to Be a Lawyer” in the June 2002 issue of MPPA [MPPA 2002;17(2):57]. I understand and sympathize with her. Many physicians who, like her, are involved in these cases for altruistic reasons rather than pure commercial—-and I believe that this is more common in the world of performing arts medicine—-must find themselves in the same predicament. However, in the words of an eminent English lawyer, who qualified and practiced as a gynecologist before turning to the law, when considering medical and scientific evidence (or in many cases, including performers, non-scientific evidence!): “However scientific the subject matter of the claim and however recondite the evidence and the argument, the legal definitions must apply in a Court of Law; the problem for the lawyer is in making the scientist understand a totally different concept of proof required by the court.” Therefore physicians involved, whether altruistic or not, must understand the basis of these claims.

Part VI The Law of Property, 29 The Distinction Between Movables and Immovables

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torremans Paul
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines the distinction between movables and immovables under English private international law. The first task of the court in a private international law case when required to rule on the question of a proprietary or possessory nature is to decide whether the item of property in dispute is movable or immovable. The legal system that will be applicable to the case depends on this preliminary decision. This chapter first considers the classification of the subject matter of ownership into movables and immovables by the law of the situs before looking at some examples relating to mortgages, trusts for sale, and annuities. It also discusses the relevance of the distinction between realty and personalty and concludes by explaining the distinction between tangible and intangible movables.

Service of Process in England on Overseas Companies and Article 5(5) of the Brussels Convention

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 921-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson E. Enonchong
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
English Court ◽  
Natural Person ◽  
The Law ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
A Company

It is generally accepted that, in actions in personam, the foundation of the court's jurisdiction at common law is the service of process.1 To this extent the rules as to service define the limits of the court's jurisdiction. So, for a claimant to establish the jurisdiction of the English court over an overseas company2 he must be able to serve process on the company in accordance with the rules of service. The general rule is that an overseas company, like an individual, may be served with process in England if present within the jurisdiction.3 However, since a company is only a legal (not natural) person, it cannot be present in the same way as an individual. It has therefore been necessary for special rules to be laid down by which it can be determined whether or not an overseas company is present in England and therefore may be served with process here. Before 1992 those rules were contained in sections 691 and 695 of the Companies Act 19854 (the pre-1992 regime). However, in 1992 the law was amended and a separate provision was laid down in section 694A of the Companies Act 1985 to regulate the service of process on any overseas company with a branch in Great Britain (the 1992 regime).

scholarly journals Indonesia Sharia Bank Merger Process Reviewed from Business Competition Laws

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahyb Handyanto ◽  
Monita Sri Astuti ◽  
Kevin Surya Ajiputra
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Islamic Banks ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Large Market ◽  
Bank Merger ◽  
Merger Process ◽  
Competition Laws ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Competition Situation

Islamic bank entities in Indonesia, namely BNI Syariah, BRI Syariah, and Bank Syariah Mandiri have merged to become Bank Syariah Indonesia. The merger process was effective on February 1, 2021. As we know, the three banks are state-owned, which have significant assets and have a reasonably large market in Indonesia. In connection with business competition law which seeks to create a fair business competition situation in Indonesia, every corporate action, including merger activities, must be notified to the Business Competition Supervision Commission (hereinafter as KPPU) to assess whether monopolistic practices or unfair business competition have occurred or not. The notification is an effort to supervise every business actor in order to carry out activities that do not violate business competition and do not harm other parties. This study aims to examine normatively the merger process carried out based on business competition law in Indonesia. The research uses materials from both regulations, legal principles, doctrine, and sources related to the subject matter. The data obtained were then analyzed for further analysis to produce conclusions. The results showed that the merger process between the three Islamic banks in Indonesia did not violate the business competition law because it did not occur in a position monopoly and the absence of monopolistic practices.

scholarly journals GOVERNMENT-OWNED ENTERPRISES (GOEs) IN INDONESIA’S COMPETITION LAW AND PRACTICE

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Arie Siswanto ◽  
Marihot Janpieter Hutajulu
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enterprises ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Direct Head ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law

<p>In the competition law discourse, one of the controversial issues is the position of Government-Owned Enterprises (GOEs). There are basically two main views regarding the status of GOEs in the competition law. First, GOEs should be granted privileges, even excluded from the scope of business competition law. Secondly, since GOEs are basically businesses and competitors to private enterprises, GOEs must also be subject to competition law. This paper discusses the status of GOEs in Indonesia’s competition law, both in the context of normative framework and in the implementation of competition law provisions. For this purpose, this paper examine the rules of competition law governing the GOEs and analyze some cases of alleged violations of competition law examined by the KPPU as the Indonesian competition authority. This study found that basically Indonesia’s competition law follows the so-called “competitive neutrality” principle in which the law treat both GOEs and private enterprises in equal manner. However, at the practical domain, the cases studied indicates that monopolistic or dominant position held by GOEs may be abused to favor subsidiaries which are in direct, head to head competition, with private enterprises.</p><p><strong><br /></strong></p><p align="center"> </p>

scholarly journals Tinjauan Terhadap Hukum Persaingan Usaha Di Indonesia Dari Perspektif Hukum Perlindungan Konsumen

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-30
Author(s):  
Desi Apriani
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Unfair Competition ◽  
Public Welfare ◽  
Business World ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fair Competition ◽  
Consumer Interests ◽  
The Law

The business world is something that cannot be separated from business competition. There are business actors who compete in a fair competition  and there are also business actors who compete in a unfair competition. This is where the importance of the presence of business competition law in a country. In Indonesia, business competition law is contained in Law Number 5 of 1999 which prohibits monopolistic practices and unfair business competition. In relation to consumer protection, Law Number 5 Year 1999 has the aim of protecting the public interest and seeking public welfare. The prohibitions in the law indirectly have a protected effect on consumer interests. Need consistency in enforcement of business competition law so that the goal of protecting consumers can be achieved optimally.

Constitutional and Administrative Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Writing Style ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Self Test ◽  
The Law

The purpose of this book is to introduce the reader to the fundamental principles and concepts of constitutional and administrative law. It is highly popular with undergraduates for its clear writing style and the ease with which it guides the reader through key principles of public law. This eleventh edition incorporates the significant developments in this ever-changing area of the law. The book also includes a range of useful features to help students get to grips with the subject matter. These include further reading suggestions to support deeper research, a large number of self-test questions to help reinforce knowledge, and chapter summaries and numbered paragraphs to aid navigation and revision. This new edition has been fully updated to cover all the latest developments in constitutional and administrative law, including those relating to devolution and Brexit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document