Chapters

Jurisdiction and Intellectual Property

Written jurisdiction clause

 

Enforcement of IPRs and Border Controls

Goods in transit through the European Community

para.13-022. For application in England of the Class International decision, see Eli Lilly and Co and another v 8PM Chemist Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 24.

Intellectual Property and Article 81

No-challenge clauses

para 8.192 In Knorr-Bremse [2008] EWHC 156, which concerned an application whereby the defendant disputed the jurisdiction of the English court, an issue rose whether a no-challenge clause in a settlement agreement prevented the claimant from raising the validity of a European patent in English proceedings. The High Court of England held that there was a good arguable case that the clause was contrary to Art.81 (applying Bayer v Sullhofer) on the grounds that the relevant market was oligopolistic.

Plant Variety Rights in Europe

Requirements for Protection
Distinctness

Para 6-034. In T-95/06 FCAVC v CPVO, the CFI dismissed an appeal from the Board of Appeal rejecting an application on the grounds that the variety applied for was not distinct from a reference variety. The applicant alleged a number of defects in the decision which were all dismissed. The CFI emphasised that its ability to interfere with a decision from the Board of Appeal was very much limited to one of judicial review (see para 6-054).

Appeal

 

Design Protection in Europe

Table of Contracting States

para. 5-009. The European Community has acceded to the Geneva version of the Hague Agreement.This means that an applicant can designate the European Community and obtain a Community Registered Design via a Hague Agreement filing.

Spare parts