The creative potential is an important building block for a company’s success. Therefore, an effective protection of intellectual property is even more important to guard against imitators.
To ensure comprehensive protection of intellectual property, there is a bundle of industrial property rights, summarized under the term Industrial Property Protection. These essentially include trademark law, competition law, copyright law, and patent law, explains the commercial law firm MTR Rechtsanwälte.
Patent law serves to protect technical inventions. By registering a patent, the exclusive right of use and exploitation is granted to the patent holder. The European Court of Justice made it clear with its decision of April 28, 2022 (Case No.: C-44/21), that an injunction due to patent infringement cannot be refused on the grounds that the patent has not at least survived a first-instance opposition or nullity procedure. Thus, urgent legal protection in patent disputes in Germany is again more enforceable.
The German patent courts have been rather cautious in questions of urgent legal protection in patent matters. The background is that the courts often do not want to order interim measures if they cannot be sure that the patent in question is legally valid. The ECJ has rejected this practice. The case law of several higher regional courts, which generally refuse injunctive relief in patent infringement cases if the disputed patent has not yet been confirmed in a first-instance opposition or nullity procedure, violates European law, the ECJ clarified.
Previously, several higher regional courts assumed that it was not sufficient for the issuance of an injunction in an alleged patent infringement that a patent was granted by the competent patent office. They required that in addition to the technical review of patentability by the patent office, a confirmation of patentability should also be provided.
The Regional Court of Munich considered this view to be contrary to European law and referred the case to the ECJ. The ECJ ruled that the case law of the higher regional courts violated Union law and was not compatible with Article 9 paragraph 1 of the Enforcement Directive 2004/48. The directive ensures a high level of protection for intellectual property, but according to the ECJ, it was practically unenforceable under the case law of the higher regional courts.
Rechtsanwälte experienced in industrial property protection can advise on matters of patent protection, trademark law, competition law, or copyright law.
