German Law on Patent Injunctions: Legal Framework and Recent Developments

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property Volume 19 Issue 1 Article 14 1-28-2020 German Law on Patent Injunctions: Legal Framework and Recent Developments Peter Picht PhD University of Zurich; Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter Picht PhD, German Law on Patent Injunctions: Legal Framework and Recent Developments, 19 Chi. -Kent J. Intell. Prop. 209 (2020). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/vol19/iss1/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact . German Law on Patent Injunctions: Legal Framework and Recent Developments Cover Page Footnote Lord Justice Arnold, Professors Bentley, Chien, Contreras, Dinwoodie, Golden, Husovec, and all participants of the Tilburg University’s 2018 Conference on “Mapping Flexibilities for Injunctive Relief in Patent Law” This article is available in Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/ vol19/iss1/14 GERMAN LAW ON PATENT INJUNCTIONS 1/6/2020 2:34 PM GERMAN LAW ON PATENT INJUNCTIONS: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS PROF. DR. PETER GEORG PICHT, LL.M. (YALE)* INTRODUCTION For patent litigation, Germany arguably is, together with the United Kingdom, the paramount venue in Europe.1 Stakeholders, such as patentees, licensees, inhouse and outside counsel, scholars and nonGerman courts or lawmakers, therefore have a strong interest not only in the established legal framework for patent litigation in Germany, but also in shifts this framework is, of late, undergoing. At the same time, the language barrier complicates insights on these matters, not least for AngloAmerican stakeholders, although a slowly increasing part of scholarship, and even of case-law, is available in English. Against this background, the present contribution sets out to explain basic structures and recent developments in German patent injunction law. It covers the main types of and requirements for such injunctions under German law (A.), the injunction’s scope as claimed and granted (B.), bifurcation and stays (C.), defenses and limitations (D.), alternatives to injunctive relief (E.), and recent developments (F.), before a conclusion and an outlook (G.) round off the paper. * Chair for Economic Law, Chairman Center for Intellectual Property and Competition Law (CIPCO), University of Zurich; Fellow Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich. I thank Lord Justice Arnold, Professors Bentley, Chien, Contreras, Dinwoodie, Golden, Husovec, and all participants of the Tilburg University’s 2018 Conference on “Mapping Flexibilities for Injunctive Relief in Patent Law” for their valuable input on the matter. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Enhancing the patent system in Europe, at 18, COM (2007) 165 final (Apr. 3, 2007); Christoph Ann, Verletzungsgerichtsbarkeit – zentral für jedes Patentsystem und doch häufig unterschätzt, 3/4 GRUR, 205-209 (2009); Mathieu Klos, Unsere Stars für Europa, Deutschlands Patentexperten wählen ihre Favoriten für das europäische Patentgericht, 4 J UVE RECHTSMARKT, 72-83 (2010); Thomas Kühnen & Rolf Cleassen, Die Durchsetzung von Patenten in der EU – Standortbestimmung vor Einführung des europäischen Patentgerichts, 6 GRUR, 592-597 (2013). 213 GERMAN LAW ON PATENT INJUNCTIONS 214 CHICAGO-KENT J. INTELL. PROP. 1/6/2020 2:34 PM Vol 19:1 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 213 A.PATENT INJUNCTIONS: MAIN TYPES AND REQUIREMENTS .................... 216 1.MAIN TYPES .......................................................................................... 216 2.GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................... 217 3.SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS................... 219 B.SCOPE AS CLAIMED AND GRANTED....................................................... 221 C.BIFURCATION AND STAYS .................................................................... 222 2.STAY OF INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS PENDING VALIDITY PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................ 222 3.OTHER TYPES OF STAYS AND PROCEDURAL REACTIONS TO PATENT INVALIDATION ............................................................................... 224 D.DEFENSES AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................... 226 1.CONSIDERATIONS OF PUBLIC INTEREST................................................. 226 I. RELEVANCE AND TYPES OF PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS .......... 226 II. COMPULSORY LICENSES ON PUBLIC INTEREST GROUNDS ..................... 227 III. EXPROPRIATION ORDERS ON PUBLIC INTEREST GROUNDS .................. 229 2.COMPULSORY LICENSE ACCORDING TO SEC. 24(2) GPA ...................... 230 3.COMPETITION LAW................................................................................ 231 I. THE INITIAL GERMAN CASES: STANDARD-SPUNDFASS AND ORANGE BOOK............................................................................................. 231 II. THE COMMISSION’S SAMSUNG AND MOTOROLA CASES ...................... 233 III. THE CJEU’S COMMANDMENTS: HUAWEI V. ZTE................................ 234 4.GENERAL ABUSE OF RIGHTS DOCTRINE, SEC. 242 GCC ........................ 237 5.PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PATENTEE OR INFRINGER........... 237 I. INFRINGERS ........................................................................................... 237 II. PLAINTIFFS........................................................................................... 238 6.PROPORTIONALITY ................................................................................ 240 7.FURTHER LIMITATIONS ......................................................................... 240 E.ALTERNATIVES TO INJUNCTIVE RELIEFS ............................................... 242 F.RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ...................................................................... 243 1.A GENERAL PROPORTIONALITY THRESHOLD IN GERMAN PATENT INJUNCTION LAW? ......................................................................... 243 2.INJUNCTIONS IN GERMAN SEP/FRAND CASES..................................... 248 I. GERMAN CASE-LAW POST-HUAWEI ...................................................... 248 GERMAN LAW ON PATENT INJUNCTIONS 2019 1/6/2020 2:34 PM German Law on Patent Injunctions: Legal Framework and Recent Developments 215 II. THE IMPACT OF THE GENERAL PATENT LAW-DISCOURSE ON MORE FLEXIBLE INJUNCTIONS ....................... (...truncated)