Menu
Browse Options
Spain: Supreme Court, First Civil Law Chamber, 531/2014, 15 October 2014

On 15 October 2014 the Spanish Supreme Court confirmed its earlier rulings on two issues: after an IP right has been found invalid in first instance but the Court of Appeal overturns this decision because it disagrees with the argument that was the basis for invalidity in first instance, (how) should the Court of Appeal deal with other nullity arguments that have been argued before but not decided upon by the Court of First Instance? And (how) should the Court of Appeal deal with nullity arguments that were dismissed by the Court of First Instance? The decision handed down by the Supreme Court is interesting because it flags-out the need to carefully analyze the issues resolved and not expre [...]

A sneak preview of today’s CJEU judgments on the Unitary Patent Package

As announced by the Kluwer UPC News blogger earlier today, this morning the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) published its two judgments in cases C-146/13 and C-147/13 where, as expected, it has dismissed the nullity actions filed by the Kingdom of Spain (“Spain”) against Council Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012 (unitary patent) and Council Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012 (translation arrangements). What follows is our two cents after a quick reading of the decisions:

 I.              JUDGMENT ON CASE C-146/13 (UNITARY PATENT)

 1.             Lack of jurisdictional control over the EPO’s decisions:

In short, the Court, following Advocate General Bot, has co [...]

Spanish amendments to the draft new Patents Act: will Spain have rickshaws instead of cars in the streets?

In September of 2013, the Spanish Patents and Trademarks Office (“SPTO”) published a draft Patents Act aimed at modernising the old Act 11/1986, of 20 March, on Patents, which is close to celebrating its 30th anniversary. After hearing the stakeholders concerned, on 11 April 2014 the Council of Ministers approved the draft and sent it to Parliament, hoping that the new law could be approved before the next elections, which are expected to take place during the third or fourth quarter of 2015.

 The forthcoming elections appear to be the only rational explanation for a few of the amendments proposed by some of the parliamentary groups, which were published on 13 April 2015. Rather surprisingl [...]

The Applicable Law in the UPC: Some Reflections sparked by the OCR

The OCR (“Old Combination Room”) at Christ College is a lovely, warm and inspiring pine-paneled room located at the heart of one of the most traditional colleges at Cambridge University. For many many decades, like the OCRs of other colleges at Cambridge and at the other leading English university, it has been a place for gathering, sparking friendships and reflection. However, at the OCR of Christ College one has to be careful because not everything is what it seems. Hanging on one of the walls there is an old portrait of Historian Laurence Echard (1670-1730), who appears to have freckles and moles on his face. But upon closer inspection, what looks like freckles and moles turns out to be t [...]

More on the Judgment of 12 March 2015 of the CJEU in Actavis v. BI

In the blog published on 17 March 2015, we discussed the judgment dated 12 March 2015 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) handed down in response to the preliminary questions referred by the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Chancery Division (Patents Court) in a case between Actavis Group EHF, Actavis UK Ltd (“Actavis”) and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (“BI”) dealing with a combination product (Telmisartan and HCTZ). As highlighted in that blog, in this recent judgment the CJEU appears to have come to the conclusion that for the purposes of article 3 (a) and (c) of Regulation (EC) 469/2009, the relevant test is whether the combination as such constit [...]

The Judgment of 12 March 2015 of the CJEU in Actavis v. BI: is the “subject-matter of the patent” test crafted by the AG in Medeva to replace the “core inventive advance” test?

On 12 March 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) published the judgment announced in our last blog in Case C-577/13, in response to some of the preliminary questions referred by the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Chancery Division (Patents Court) in a case between Actavis Group EHF, Actavis UK Ltd (“Actavis”) and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG. (“BI”).  The facts of the case before the referring Court may be summarised as follows:

Background of the case:

On 9 August 1999, BI was granted a Supplementary Protection Certificate (“SPC”) for Telmisartan based on a marketing authorisation for Telmisartan granted on 16 December 1998 and patent EP (UK) 50 [...]

Contributors, Authors, Books, & More...