When are IP holders liable for enforcing a later invalidated IP right?

On behalf of our entire IP team, we first and foremost would like to wish you the very best for the New Year, and invite you to our first IP Update of 2023.
At this IP Update, our IP specialists, Christophe Ronse and Kirian Claeyé, will discuss under what circumstances IP holders may be held liable for enforcing a later invalidated IP right.
As many of you will know, this is a ‘hot’ topic. In 2019, the CJEU delivered its judgment in Bayer v Gedeon Richter (C-688/17), which addressed this question regarding the loss suffered from a provisional injunction based on a subsequently invalidated patent. On 11 October 2022, the Brussels Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in Mylan v Novartis applying the CJEU’s principles to a case where the patentee had enforced a provisional injunction based on the Belgian tier of a subsequently invalidated European patent. The day before, on 10 October 2022, the Finnish Markinnaoikeus had referred another question for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU relating to a subsequently invalidated SPC (C-473/22).
Christophe and Kirian will focus on these two judgments and the pending referral in the broader context of earlier case law and explain what their outcomes could mean for your business. They will answer questions that include:
- Is an IP holder automatically liable for enforcing a provisional injunction based on a later invalidated IP right?
- Is the answer different if it concerns a first instance provisional injunction that is later overturned on appeal?
- Under what circumstances would an IP holder be considered to have ‘abused’ its right to enforce the later invalidated right?
This webinar will be in English and has been accredited with 1 point by the IBJ/IJE.
We look forward to virtually meeting you soon!
Your hosts
Recommended articles
New year, new policy: CPVO updates its public access to documents policy
The Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) recently revised its public access to documents policy to align with the European Union (EU)’s evolving transparency standards. Effective since 15 January 2025, the new policy seeks to ensure broad access to all documents that the CPVO holds, while protecting private parties’ commercial interests. In particular, a system of prior confidentiality requests has been put in place for applicants of Community plant variety rights (CPVR).
Read onEuropean Commission proposes new PPP labelling requirements
On 6 January 2025, the European Commission published a draft proposal aimed at further harmonising labelling requirements for plant protection products (PPPs) in the European Union (EU). The proposal intends to repeal the existing labelling rules and introduce certain new requirements, including mandatory digital labelling. Since the draft proposal has not yet been formally adopted, some changes to the final version remain possible.
Read onCJEU C-793/22 Biohemp – Indoor Cannabis Cultivation: The CJEU Weighs in
The Cannabis sativa L. plant serves a wide range of purposes, many of which are uncontroversial. It can be grown in the EU, in which context it is commonly called ‘hemp’. The plant notably produces cannabidiol (CBD), which the Court of Justice of the European Union has unequivocally ruled is not a narcotic drug. Nonetheless, some EU Member States remain reluctant to accept hemp cultivation.
Read on