Greece: Infringement by equivalence affirmed
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 2024

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 ros bottom lb

More from across our site

External counsel for automotive companies explain how trends such as AI and vehicle connectivity are affecting their practices and reveal what their clients are prioritising
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 winners of the awards will be revealed at a gala dinner in New York City on April 25
Counsel debate the potential outcome of SCOTUS’s latest copyright case after justices questioned whether they should dismiss it
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP lawyer about their life and career
The small Düsseldorf firm is making a big impact in the UPC. Founding partner Christof Augenstein explains why
The court criticised Oppo’s attempts to delay proceedings and imposed a penalty, adding that the Chinese company may need to pay more if the trial isn’t concluded this year
Miguel Hernandez explains how he secured victory for baby care company Naterra in his first oral argument before the Federal Circuit
The UPC judges are wrong – restricting access to court documents, and making parties appoint a lawyer only to have a chance of seeing them, is madness
The group, which includes the Volkswagen, Seat and Audi brands, is now licensed to use SEPs owned by more than 60 patent owners
Gift this article