CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement

Abstract

In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).

Intellectuele eigendom

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement}, author = {van Eechoud, M.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CLIP_Brussels_%20I.pdf}, year = {0419}, date = {2007-04-19}, abstract = {In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).}, keywords = {Intellectuele eigendom}, }