Greece: Infringement by equivalence affirmed

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

Greece: Infringement by equivalence affirmed

While the doctrine of equivalents exists in theory in most Greek legal textbooks, judgments applying this theory in practice are scarce in Greece. A recently issued judgment by the Athens Court of First Instance in preliminary injunction proceedings is an important addition to this rather small number of judgments.

The dispute at issue arose when a foreign pharmaceutical company filed a preliminary injunction application against a Greek pharmaceutical company, which manufactured a pharmaceutical solution for export abroad, claiming infringement of its patented manufacturing process.

The defendant argued that its manufacturing process was different highlighting, inter alia, a difference in the order of the steps performed for the preparation of its pharmaceutical solution compared to the patented process.

The Court was not convinced by the defendant's line of defence. After providing an analysis of the doctrine of equivalents theory, the judgment found that both processes employ the same material and that the steps performed are the same. The judge added that the main features of the invention were present in both processes and that the change in the order of the process steps by the defendant had no significance for the final result.

A preliminary injunction was thus granted ordering the defendant to cease any productive activity infringing the patent, to recall the manufactured products and to provide the claimant with all information necessary to identify any parties involved in the distribution and marketing of the infringing products abroad. Furthermore the Court ordered the provisional seizure of any infringing products found in the possession of the defendant or any other party deriving rights therefrom.

A further interesting aspect of this judgment is that the products were not manufactured to be sold in Greece but were only intended to be exported for sale in foreign markets. The grant of a preliminary injunction against the manufacturer may therefore constitute an effective strategy in preventing those sales in a larger number of countries.

kilimiris.jpg

Constantinos Kilimiris


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

Erise IP has added a seven-practitioner trademark team from Hovey Williams, signalling its intention to help clients at all stages of development
News of prison sentences for ex-Samsung executives for trade secrets violation and an opposition filed by Taylor Swift were also among the top talking points
A multijurisdictional claim filed by InterDigital and a new spin-off firm in Germany were also among the top talking points
Duarte Lima, MD of Spruson & Ferguson’s Asia practice, says practitioners must adapt to process changes within IP systems, as well as be mindful of the implications of tech on their practices
Practitioners say the UK Supreme Court’s decision could boost the attractiveness of the UK for AI companies
New awards, including US ‘Firm of the Year’ and Latin America ‘Firm to Watch’, are among more than 90 prizes that will recognise firms and practitioners
DWF helped client Dairy UK secure a major victory at the UK Supreme Court
Hepworth Browne led Emotional Perception AI to victory at the UK Supreme Court, which rejected a previous appellate decision that said an AI network was not patentable
James Hill, general counsel at Norwich City FC, reveals how he balances fan engagement with brand enforcement, and when he calls on IP firms for advice
In the second of a two-part article, Gabrielle Faure-André and Stéphanie Garçon at Santarelli unpick EPO, UPC and French case law to assess the importance of clinical development timelines in inventive step analyses
Gift this article