Document Actions

Citation and metadata

Recommended citation

Tamar Khuchua, Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives, 10 (2019) JIPITEC 257 para 1.

Download Citation

Endnote

%0 Journal Article
%T Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives
%A Khuchua, Tamar
%J JIPITEC
%D 2019
%V 10
%N 2
%@ 2190-3387
%F khuchua2019
%X “It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,” professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons – more globalised Innovation and R&D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on ‘A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today’s societal challenges’, urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.
%L 340
%K European Union (EU)
%K European guidelines
%K Patent litigation
%K Unified Patent Court (UPC)
%K Unitary Patent Package (UPP)
%K divergent decisions
%K fragmentation of patent litigation
%K judicial harmonisation
%K national patent courts
%K specialised courts
%K specialised tribunals
%U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189
%P 257-271

Download

Bibtex

@Article{khuchua2019,
  author = 	"Khuchua, Tamar",
  title = 	"Different `Rules of the Game' -- Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives",
  journal = 	"JIPITEC",
  year = 	"2019",
  volume = 	"10",
  number = 	"2",
  pages = 	"257--271",
  keywords = 	"European Union (EU); European guidelines; Patent litigation; Unified Patent Court (UPC); Unitary Patent Package (UPP); divergent decisions; fragmentation of patent litigation; judicial harmonisation; national patent courts; specialised courts; specialised tribunals",
  abstract = 	"``It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,'' professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons -- more globalised Innovation and R{\&}D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on `A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today's societal challenges', urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.",
  issn = 	"2190-3387",
  url = 	"http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189"
}

Download

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Khuchua, Tamar
PY  - 2019
DA  - 2019//
TI  - Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives
JO  - JIPITEC
SP  - 257
EP  - 271
VL  - 10
IS  - 2
KW  - European Union (EU)
KW  - European guidelines
KW  - Patent litigation
KW  - Unified Patent Court (UPC)
KW  - Unitary Patent Package (UPP)
KW  - divergent decisions
KW  - fragmentation of patent litigation
KW  - judicial harmonisation
KW  - national patent courts
KW  - specialised courts
KW  - specialised tribunals
AB  - “It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,” professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons – more globalised Innovation and R&D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on ‘A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today’s societal challenges’, urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.
SN  - 2190-3387
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189
ID  - khuchua2019
ER  - 
Download

Wordbib

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"  xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" >
<b:Source>
<b:Tag>khuchua2019</b:Tag>
<b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType>
<b:Year>2019</b:Year>
<b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle>
<b:Volume>10</b:Volume>
<b:Issue>2</b:Issue>
<b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189</b:Url>
<b:Pages>257-271</b:Pages>
<b:Author>
<b:Author><b:NameList>
<b:Person><b:Last>Khuchua</b:Last><b:First>Tamar</b:First></b:Person>
</b:NameList></b:Author>
</b:Author>
<b:Title>Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives</b:Title>
<b:Comments>“It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,” professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons – more globalised Innovation and R&amp;D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on ‘A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today’s societal challenges’, urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.</b:Comments>
</b:Source>
</b:Sources>
Download

ISI

PT Journal
AU Khuchua, T
TI Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives
SO JIPITEC
PY 2019
BP 257
EP 271
VL 10
IS 2
DE European Union (EU); European guidelines; Patent litigation; Unified Patent Court (UPC); Unitary Patent Package (UPP); divergent decisions; fragmentation of patent litigation; judicial harmonisation; national patent courts; specialised courts; specialised tribunals
AB “It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,” professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons – more globalised Innovation and R&D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on ‘A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today’s societal challenges’, urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.
ER

Download

Mods

<mods>
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Different ‘Rules of the Game’ – Impact of National Court Systems on Patent Litigation in the EU and the Need for New Perspectives</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Khuchua</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">Tamar</namePart>
  </name>
  <abstract>“It seems that the jurisdiction in which a case is litigated has a significant impact on its outcome,” professor Lemley has addressed the issue of forum shopping in the US and internationally, and claims that the venue of litigation defines the case outcome. Indeed, patent litigation is highly diverse especially in Europe. This is mainly derived from the following reasons – more globalised Innovation and R&amp;D results in increased cross-border enforcement with some inherent challenges. In addition, the existence of different sets of rules and different national courts that hear the patent infringement and invalidity cases in each European state makes the litigation process quite complex. The country-specific characteristics of patent litigation are considered as an impediment for the development of harmonised EU patent law. Both patentees and alleged infringers, depending on the litigation venue, face legal uncertainties and encounter different outcomes even when the same patented invention is concerned. In light of these differences in national systems and judicial practices, the European Commission in its 2017 Communication Paper on ‘A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today’s societal challenges’, urged the Member States to set up effective mechanisms for IPR enforcement or to improve already existing systems. The article, looking at the specific examples of national judiciaries, outlines the differences between the enforcement mechanisms and case law across the Member States, it discusses the impact of the cross-border patent enforcement in the EU, and finally, it suggests possible solutions on an institutional and methodological level for European judiciary aiming at elimination of fragmented patent litigation and fostering an innovation eco-system in the EU.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>European Union (EU)</topic>
    <topic>European guidelines</topic>
    <topic>Patent litigation</topic>
    <topic>Unified Patent Court (UPC)</topic>
    <topic>Unitary Patent Package (UPP)</topic>
    <topic>divergent decisions</topic>
    <topic>fragmentation of patent litigation</topic>
    <topic>judicial harmonisation</topic>
    <topic>national patent courts</topic>
    <topic>specialised courts</topic>
    <topic>specialised tribunals</topic>
  </subject>
  <classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
    <genre>academic journal</genre>
    <titleInfo>
      <title>JIPITEC</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <part>
      <detail type="volume">
        <number>10</number>
      </detail>
      <detail type="issue">
        <number>2</number>
      </detail>
      <date>2019</date>
      <extent unit="page">
        <start>257</start>
        <end>271</end>
      </extent>
    </part>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
  <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189</identifier>
  <identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-49189</identifier>
  <identifier type="citekey">khuchua2019</identifier>
</mods>
Download

Full Metadata

JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law
Article search
Extended article search
Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter
Follow Us
twitter
 
Navigation