Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Germany: CJEU requirements in FRAND cases

For years, the courts have been preoccupied with infringement proceedings that are conducted by standard essential patents (SEP) holders, who previously submitted declarations as part of the standardization process, namely assurances that prospective licensees will be granted licences under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) conditions. The dispute is particularly about the extent to which an SEP can be enforced in court by dominant companies without them, in doing so, breaching the antitrust abuse law under Article 102 TFEU.

In its judgment Huawei Technologies / ZTE from July 16 2015 (Rn C-170/13), the CJEU showed how patent holders and patent infringers should behave in infringement proceedings concerning a SEP with a FRAND declaration, to avoid committing an antitrust infringement and thereby be able to rely on the antitrust compulsory licence objection (proprietor) and not to risk a sentence for the omission of further acts of use (patent infringer):

Although, through the submission of a FRAND declaration, the patentee does not waive the judicial assertion of injunctive relief or recall claims, he does, however, create a legitimate expectation to that effect, on the basis of which he is obliged to point out to patent infringers their alleged infringement before bringing an action for injunction or recall and to hear their case. If the infringer expresses his willingness to license the patent, the owner of the SEP must make this infringer a licence offer, which must meet FRAND terms and specify the licence fees and how they are calculated.

The patent infringer has an obligation to respond to this offer with the due care resulting from the established practice in the relevant field and acting in good faith. Delaying tactics are forbidden. If he does not wish to accept the patentee's offer, he must make a counter offer within a short period, which in turn must correspond to FRAND terms. Should this counter offer be rejected, the infringer is also obliged to deposit adequate security in accordance with business practice in which also the infringer's billable number of past acts of use is considered. However, during the licence negotiations, the infringer is not prevented from attacking the legal validity of the patent in suit and/or from denying its usage and/or its essentiality for the implemented standard.

If the parties do not reach an agreement in this manner, the CJEU shall grant them the opportunity, by mutual consent, to have the licence terms determined by an independent third party, who has to decide within a short deadline.

Finally – according to the CJEU – the patent holder's possibility to sue the patent infringer for previous acts of infringement, requesting accounting and/or damages, is not affected by Article 102 TFEU.

The CJEU's chosen course thus strikes a balance between the owner-friendly Orange Book jurisprudence of the Bundesgerichtshof and the user-friendly Motorola decision of the European Commission dated April 29 2014 (C [2014] 2892).


Marco Stief

Stefan G Fuchs

Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbHElisenhof, Elisenstr 3D-80335, Munich, GermanyTel: +49 89 74 72 660 Fax: +49 89 77 64

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas has hired former Anand & Anand partner Swati Sharma and hopes to compete with specialist IP firms
Rapporteur-Judge András Kupecz ruled that education and training weren’t legitimate reasons for a member of the public to access documents
Searches for comparison prior art will be a little easier, but practitioners will have to put more thought into claim construction and design patent titles
The Helsinki local division rejected AIM Sport’s request for a preliminary injunction in a dispute with rival Supponor
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The FTC’s plans to scrutinise improperly listed Orange Book patents could make these listings more important in litigation, but firms should be looking at this anyway
Counsel at Debevoise & Plimpton explain how they helped food delivery business Grubhub avoid a preliminary injunction at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
European lawyers tell Managing IP how the legal market is reacting to the first few months of the UPC and why cases are set to take off
The ban could be extended or cancelled, depending on whether Judge Pauline Newman cooperates with an investigation, the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit stated
Sources say some China-based lawyers are prepared to take large pay cuts to join stable practices, but most firms are sceptical about new hires