Search News and Articles
Legal Developments Worldwide
- United Arab Emirates
- Austria
- Azerbaijan
- Belgium
- Bahrain
- Bosnia-Herzegovina
- Bulgaria
- Belarus
- China
- Croatia
- Cyprus
- Czech Republic
- Germany
- Denmark
- Egypt
- Spain
- Estonia
- Finland
- France
- Greece
- Guernsey
- Gibraltar
- Hong Kong
- Hungary
- Indonesia
- India
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Jersey
- Cayman Islands
- Kazakhstan
- Lithuania
- Latvia
- Luxembourg
- Malta
- Moldova
- Mexico
- Malaysia
- Netherlands
- Norway
- Philippines
- Poland
- Portugal
- Qatar
- Romania
- Russia
- South Africa
- Sweden
- Singapore
- South Korea
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Saudi Arabia
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Thailand
- Turkey
- Ukraine
- Uzbekistan
- Vietnam
- British Virgin Islands
- Serbia
- Guernsey
- Jersey
- Mauritius
- Montenegro
- Senegal
- UK
Articles contributed by Bardehle Pagenberg
Court of Justice of the European Union renders final decision on...
Supplementary Protection Certificates with regard to second marketing authorization of medical compounds (decision of July 19, 2012 – Case C-130/11 –Neurim Pharmaceuticals vs. Comptroller General of Patents)
German Federal Supreme Court clarifies requirements for testing infringement of a Community design
(decision of September 28, 2011 – Case I ZR 23/10 – Kinderwagen/Pram)
Reported by Dr. Henning Hartwig
German Federal Supreme Court strengthens position of foreign-language patent applicants
Mistakes in the German translation of a patent application filed in a foreign language can be corrected anytime and do not lead to loss of the patent.
Dusseldorf Appeal Court grants protection against imitation of a rear light for trucks
In a decision which has just become final, the Dusseldorf Appeal Court granted protection against distributing a replica of a rear light for trucks (Case No I-20 U 68/10).
German Federal Supreme Court on the limits of patent infringement under the doctrine of equivalents
Decision of September 13, 2011 - Case X ZR 69/10 - Diglycidverbindung/Diglycidyl Compounds
If the description of a patent discloses several possibilities to achieve a specific technical effect, but only one of these possibilities is included in the patent claim, an infringement under the doctrine of equivalents can only be assumed if the attacked solution in its specific effects corresponds to the claimed solution and differs in a similar manner as the claimed solution from the non-claimed solution which was disclosed only in the description.
Getting the Deal Through/Licensing
Law Business Research, 2011