Greece: Immediate effect/enforceability of relevant orders for parallel imports

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

Greece: Immediate effect/enforceability of relevant orders for parallel imports

In a recent case relating to automotive spare parts parallel imports, an interesting issue was raised regarding immediate effect/enforceability of the Court`s order on commercial information disclosure.

More specifically, the Athens Special IP Full-Bench Court, ruling on a trade mark proprietors' main infringement action against a Greek grey – importer company, ordered the latter, among others, to provide the claimants with legally certified copies of all commercial invoices by way of which, the products of trade mark proprietors, being the subject of said main action, were purchased by the defendant and sold to third parties and also to provide the claimants with a written statement containing the full particulars of any natural or legal entity, from whom products of the same nature were purchased, both covering a specific time period, and both at the defendant's own expense.

The above may be considered as standard practice/ruling, in the case that main infringement actions relating to parallel imports have been accepted, according to the IPED, the domestic trade mark law provisions and relevant case-law.

What is new, is that the aforementioned Court`s order has not been declared provisionally enforceable, on the basis of the following interesting ruling: Court orders that are issued pursuant to Articles 452 and 904 par.2 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, like the one discussed above, are considered to be immediately enforceable/effective against the defendant; therefore, neither the Court shall declare their provisional enforceability, nor should the claimants wait until they become final and irrevocable in order to be enforced.

Notably, it seems that said judgment sets new standards on Court`s orders regarding commercial information disclosure, which are anyway frequently present in parallel imports cases, for the sake of simplification and acceleration of proceedings as well as trade mark proprietors` relief.

Georgios Panagopoulos


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

IP STARS, Managing IP’s accreditation title, reveals its latest rankings for patent work, including which firms are moving up
Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Gift this article