Menu
Browse Options
Can the validity presumption in Danish PI proceedings be weakened due to lacking prosecution steps?

Since July 2013 when the Danish Maritime & Commercial Court (MCC) took over as IPR specialty court in Denmark for PI cases also, the technical judges have taken part in the adjudication of PI patent cases also. Although the MCC has no legal basis to render judgement declaring patents in the course of PI proceedings, the fact that the bench is now made up of one legal judge and two technical judges in practice means that a well-documented invalidity defence may prove fruitful, whereas the invalidity defences in the past were almost invariably turned down by the bailiff’s who presided over patent PI cases due to the court’s lack of technical insight.
In a recent case (F&H A/S v. Bodum (Skandin [...]

Local UPC chamber to be set up in Denmark

On Friday, 21 February 2014, the Danish Government announced its plans to establish a local division of the UPC in Copenhagen if the Danish referendum on Denmark’s accession to the UPC should turn out positive.

The decision is the result of a political agreement with almost all Danish parties represented in parliament and is widely seen as a counter-move to address concerns voiced by parties in opposition to Denmark’s accession to the UPC. Danish UPC sceptics have expressed concerns in relation to Danish SMEs being forced to conduct proceedings in foreign jurisdictions – not just as plaintiffs, but – perhaps more importantly – as defendants (which, by far, would appear to the role in whi [...]

Information cannot constitute a patentable, technical feature – a recent Danish decision on waste paper bags

In a recent decision by the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court, the issue was whether a technical feature may consist in information attached to an object if such information increases the usability of the object.

The case T-66-07, Svenco Papperssäcker AB v. Segezha Packaging A/S, Svenco had filed suit claiming infringement of its Danish patent DK 175 996D1 claiming that Segezha had infringed this patent by marketing wastepaper bags with an inside line marking the maximum content of the wastepaper bag.

Segezha, on the other hand, entered a plea of invalidity of the patent-in-suit.

Against this background, the parties requested that the court-appointed experts of its own – as is usual in D [...]

Finally a reform of the Danish IPR enforcement is to be expected

As any practitioner who has come in contact with the Danish legal system in connection with disputes concerning IPR will know, until now, the complexities quite often involved in such cases have often proven difficult for Danish courts, especially enforcement courts, to handle.

Consequently, it has for many years been a focal point of IPR advisors that the Danish court system, and especially the enforcement system, be reformed to address the lack of expertise on the bench.

The Danish Secretary of Justice has now, on 1 November 2012, presented a bill to the Danish parliament in order to address these issues and modernise the Danish enforcement court system.

If passed, the enforcement court sy [...]

UPC Rules of Procedure – Will they address concerns of small-country SMEs?

In the wake of the UPC Agreement having been entered into under the Danish presidency, there was widespread euphoria about the many, potentially positive, aspects of Danish SME litigants being able to save substantial costs under the envisaged UPC regime.

The Danish press abounded in positive reviews put forward by politicians and industry representatives alike, who were all able to invoke examples of some of the present system absurdities including mixed outcomes of patent litigation throughout Europe that would now finally be of interest to only legal historians.

One example offered by a representative of the industry was an instance in which a medium-sized Danish enterprise had been force [...]

The Danish High Court sets aside a patent as “presumably invalid” for the first time

The pan-European litigation between Danish companies Danisco A/S (today a part of DuPont) and Novozymes A/S has been extensively reported in posts on this blog (12/08/2011; 21/09/2011; 10/01/2012; 09/07/2012; 03/08/2012). The litigation has involved Novozymes’ European Patent EP 1 804 592 B1 on the manufacture of certain enzyme-containing animal food pellets. In a decision announced on 31 July 2012, the European Patent was finally revoked by the Board of Appeal of the EPO thus bringing to an end most (if not all) of this litigation (divisional utility models are still in force in Germany and in Finland).

Even though this brought the EPO opposition proceedings to an end at what appears to be [...]

Contributors, Authors, Books, & More...