分离、联合还是两者兼有?统一专利法院的侵权与有效性

Nora Kessler, Christoph Palzer
{"title":"分离、联合还是两者兼有?统一专利法院的侵权与有效性","authors":"Nora Kessler, Christoph Palzer","doi":"10.1093/jiplp/jpae050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The so-called separation principle, according to which claims for infringement and the validity of a patent are assigned to different specialized courts, is a peculiarity of the German patent system, albeit not unique to it. Much more widespread across Europe is the so-called principle of unity, which provides infringement and validity to be decided jointly at the same court. The drafters of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), however, did not favour one principle over the other, and thus did not opt for a bifurcated or a non-bifurcated system; rather they decided in favour of a hybrid system. Against this background, at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the interplay of infringement and validity is rather complex. What this looks like exactly is the focus of this article, which also keeps an eye on the legal situation in Germany.","PeriodicalId":508706,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice","volume":"17 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Separated, united or a bit of both? Infringement and validity at the Unified Patent Court\",\"authors\":\"Nora Kessler, Christoph Palzer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jiplp/jpae050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The so-called separation principle, according to which claims for infringement and the validity of a patent are assigned to different specialized courts, is a peculiarity of the German patent system, albeit not unique to it. Much more widespread across Europe is the so-called principle of unity, which provides infringement and validity to be decided jointly at the same court. The drafters of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), however, did not favour one principle over the other, and thus did not opt for a bifurcated or a non-bifurcated system; rather they decided in favour of a hybrid system. Against this background, at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the interplay of infringement and validity is rather complex. What this looks like exactly is the focus of this article, which also keeps an eye on the legal situation in Germany.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice\",\"volume\":\"17 18\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpae050\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpae050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据所谓的分离原则,专利的侵权请求和有效性请求被分配给不同的专门法院,这是德国专利制度的一个特点,尽管并非德国独有。在整个欧洲,所谓的统一原则更为普遍,该原则规定侵权和有效性由同一法院共同裁决。然而,《统一专利法院协定》(UPCA)的起草者们并没有偏向于某一原则,因此没有选择分叉或非分叉制度,而是决定采用混合制度。在此背景下,在统一专利法院(UPC),侵权与有效性之间的相互作用相当复杂。本文将关注德国的法律状况,并探讨其具体表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Separated, united or a bit of both? Infringement and validity at the Unified Patent Court
The so-called separation principle, according to which claims for infringement and the validity of a patent are assigned to different specialized courts, is a peculiarity of the German patent system, albeit not unique to it. Much more widespread across Europe is the so-called principle of unity, which provides infringement and validity to be decided jointly at the same court. The drafters of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), however, did not favour one principle over the other, and thus did not opt for a bifurcated or a non-bifurcated system; rather they decided in favour of a hybrid system. Against this background, at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the interplay of infringement and validity is rather complex. What this looks like exactly is the focus of this article, which also keeps an eye on the legal situation in Germany.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信