(Indirect) infringement

Vetrotech Saint-Gobain (International) (hereinafter referred to as “Vetrotech”) is the holder of European patent No. 0 620 781 designating France, filed on 5 August 1993 and granted on 19 May 1999,…

Contrary to the decision of the Opposition Division issued two weeks later, the District Court of The Hague held Novozymes’ patent to be novel and inventive. It also held the patent indirectly…

The issue of whether obtaining a marketing authorisation before the expiry of a patent covering the product that the marketing authorisation concerns will infringe upon the right of the patentee has…

The readers will recall that one of the requirements for obtaining preliminary injunctions introduced by Directive 2004/48 (the so-called "Enforcement Directive") is proving that there is an …

by Stephan von Petersdorff-Campen In my post of 28 April 2011, I reported that the Düsseldorf Appellate Court (Oberlan-desgericht) does not require urgency for inspection orders, whereas urgency is…

To stay, or not to stay, that is the question. But not in the recent Danisco v. Novozymes case before the District Court of The Hague. On the face of the Court’s decision of 22 June 2011, the…

After years of not having handed down judgments in patent cases, in recent months the Supreme Court has handed down several interesting judgments which will hopefully give more guidance to lower…

This blog relates to the decision "Lungenfunktionsmessgerät" (lung function analyser) by the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) of Duesseldorf (judgement of 24 February 2011, docket no. I-2 U…

AstraZeneca enforced its patent for an asymmetrical synthetic route to obtain esomeprazole in Denmark. The API manufacturer of the allegedly infringing pharmaceutical had developed its own-…