Germany: Submissions filed in second instance nullity proceedings

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Germany: Submissions filed in second instance nullity proceedings

In the court decision X ZR 111/13 – Telekommunikationsverbindung, the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) discussed the flexibility that the parties have to amend the issues of dispute in second instance nullity proceedings. The case being considered relates to appeal proceedings before the German Federal Court of Justice reviewing the first instance decision in terms of the revocation of a patent by the German Federal Patent Court (BPatG).

In its decision, the Federal Court of Justice confirmed the revocation of the patent at first instance by the Federal Patent Court in respect of obviousness. The Federal Court of Justice considered new requests filed by the patentee at the stage of the second instance appeal proceedings to be inadmissible, since these new requests did not take account of a legal opinion expressed by the Federal Court of Justice which deviated from the first-instance assessment and the late-filing was due to the negligence of the party.

The decision at issue in the Federal Court of Justice takes into consideration previous rulings, such as the decision X ZR 2/13 – Analog-Digital-Wandler of the Federal Court of Justice of May 27 2014, in which it was considered that new requests may not be rejected if they represent an appropriate reaction to a notification given by the court during the appeal hearing.

In the decision at issue, the Federal Court of Justice went even further by stating that the patentee did not substantially react during first instance proceedings to the notification of the first instance court drawing the parties' attention to an attack made by the claimant. Therefore, the late-filing is considered to be due to the negligence of the party and, consequently, the new requests of the respective party are inadmissible in second instance proceedings, a ruling comparable to the European practice, as established in G 9/91 and G 10/91 for inter partes appeal procedures.

As a result, amendments and auxiliary requests filed in second instance nullity proceedings are to be rejected unless a deficiency occurred in the first instance proceedings, or late-filing is not due to the negligence of the party.

Lud_Simon

Simon Quartus Lud


Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbHElisenhof, Elisenstr 3D-80335, Munich, GermanyTel: +49 89 74 72 660 Fax: +49 89 77 64 24info@maiwald.euwww.maiwald.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article