Greece: PI maintained despite non­final ruling on infringement

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Greece: PI maintained despite non­final ruling on infringement

According to the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, while a main infringement action is pending, the defendant has the right to request that a preliminary injunction, previously granted for the same cause of action and between the same parties, be lifted on the basis of either an error in law or/and of an error in fact.

In a recent judgment regarding a main patent infringement action, the Greek Full Bench Court of First Instance specialised in IP matters maintained a preliminary injunction previously granted by the Single Court of First Instance and set aside the defendant's relevant request on the following grounds:

1) The Full Bench Court appointed experts to address questions on the patent's infringement. In this context, it was held that at this stage of proceedings the Full Bench Court could not overturn the ruling delivered in preliminary injunction proceedings, namely that the patent was valid and infringed. In this regard, it was emphasised that the Full Bench Court was not in a position to rule, either with certainty or with a probability on the patent's infringement, without the technical assistance of the appointed experts.

2) The balance of convenience was in the claimant's favour, as the latter's harm, should the preliminary injunction be lifted, was found to be hardly reversible, as opposed to the harm to be suffered by the defendant if the injunction remained in force.

In this remarkably sophisticated judgment, the injunction granted, survived by having passed a twofold test, as set under (1) and (2) above. In essence, the Court of the main action maintained the injunction because the claimant passed test (1) – the infringement test before the Court in injunction proceedings and test (2) – the balance of convenience test before the Court of the main action.

The Full Bench Court emphasised that it may reassess its position following delivery of the appointed expert's report, even in the form of a nonfinal judgment. This seems to be a stepbystep approach, with no previous case law precedent, that may well safeguard just and fair results in patent litigation that is highly complex in both legal and technical terms.

metaxakis.jpg

Manolis Metaxakis


Patrinos & Kilimiris7, Hatziyianni Mexi Str.GR-11528 AthensGreeceTel: +30210 7222906, 7222050Fax: +30210 7222889info@patrinoskilimiris.comwww.patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Speaking to Managing IP at Via’s Bridge Summit in San Francisco, president Kevin Mack explains why the AI infrastructure boom is forcing a rethink of traditional SEP licensing and FRAND models
Law firms continue to sell clients on international footprints, but sprawling office networks count for little if financial structures discourage internal collaboration
Via's Qi pool expands its footprint in Asia with the addition of Chinese smartphone giant and Japanese auto company
Matthew Cassie becomes the tenth partner to join the firm’s London outpost, and the second since it opened its new headquarters in May this year
A&O Shearman and Fish & Richardson invested in German talent, meanwhile, major firms have assembled for an on the merits case pitting KeeeX against OpenAI and Adobe
Julia Bishop is director of IP at Twilio in the US
Hellberg is an IP director at Essity in Sweden
Palińska is the business & IP law lead at CD Projekt Red in Poland
Teemu Itälä is head of legal and compliance for technology standards at Nokia in Finland
David Degen is senior IP counsel at Novartis, Switzerland
Gift this article