Brazil: Brazil offers attractive battleground for enforcing patents

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

Brazil: Brazil offers attractive battleground for enforcing patents

Sponsored by

daniel-400px.png

Although the amount of patent litigation in Brazil is far from the level of litigation in the US, patent infringement actions are very common in the jurisdiction. Such actions are the most effective measure against infringers, since preliminary injunctions are widely available. This makes Brazil very attractive as an additional battlefield for worldwide patent disputes.

Brazil has a truly independent judiciary system, and judges are doing their best to enforce the rule of law. In contrast to other BRICS countries, there is no bias against foreign companies. A great number of infringement actions initiated against local companies are filed by foreign entities, and their chances of success are basically the same as those of any other plaintiff.

In comparison with the US, the standards for obtaining injunctive relief in Brazil are much lower than one might expect as, for instance, there is no need to give notice to the defendant, and the parties are allowed to have ex parte in chambers meetings with the judges, meaning that plaintiffs are often able to obtain preliminary injunctive relief even before the defendants are served with the summons. In certain places, for example, Rio de Janeiro, plaintiffs are able to obtain injunctions more often than not.

Moreover, obtaining preliminary injunctive relief is possible even if the asserted patents cover standard-essential technologies, as in Vringo v ZTE and Ericsson v TCT. In both cases, the defendants were prevented from manufacturing, using, selling, offering and importing the infringing goods in Brazil. A preliminary injunction may also include search and seizure measures or orders for the defendant to present copies of contracts and other relevant documents, as well as notifications to third parties and to customs authorities to make relevant information about their dealings with the defendant available.

Generally, to obtain injunctive relief, the plaintiff must present sufficient documentary evidence to establish (i) the likelihood of eventually prevailing on the merits and (ii) that the result sought with the lawsuit could be frustrated or harmed if an injunction is not granted (i.e. the plaintiff must establish that granting the preliminary injunction is an urgent matter). Alternative ways of obtaining preliminary injunctions occur when the plaintiff is able to establish that the defendant is presenting defences and objections in an abusive way, or that the defendant is trying to delay the proceedings, or if the defendant is not able to create reasonable doubt regarding the facts alleged by the plaintiff.

Additionally, in order to maximise the chances of obtaining an injunction, it is usual for plaintiffs to present several technical opinions from well-known local and foreign experts, normally professors teaching at renowned universities, in support of their arguments.

In a nutshell, the lower standards for obtaining preliminary injunctive relief make Brazil a very favourable battleground to enforce patent rights in global litigation. This is an opportunity for non-practising entities (NPEs) and a substantial risk for corporations facing infringement claims.

Ricardo Nunes

Daniel Legal & IP Strategy

Av. República do Chile,

230, 3rd Floor

Centro, Rio de Janeiro

20031-170, Brazil

Tel: +55 21 2102 4212

www.daniel-ip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Richard de Bodo, who had a lengthy career at international firms, shares how he will address client needs and praises the unique offerings of smaller firms
An Australian top court decision clarifying honest concurrent use and wins by publishers against AI platforms were also among the top talking points
AIPPI has pulled the plug on its planned 2027 World Congress, and INTA has delayed hosting a meeting there, but the concerns won’t abate
Despite being outspent by a wealthy opponent, a trial attorney at King & Spalding says ‘relentless pursuit of the truth’ helped his team secure a $420m damages award for mobile gaming client
190 drugs face loss of exclusivity between 2026 and 2030, with the list including Bristol Myers Squibb’s blood-thinning drug Eliquis and immunotherapy medication Opdivo
Nokia, represented by a team from Bird & Bird, adjudged to have made fair offer to Asus and Acer in UK SEP dispute
Azhar Sadique and Kane Ridley, who founded the London office in 2023, are now both working in legal tech and AI-related roles, while another UK-based lawyer has also left
Partner Pierre Pérot rejoins the firm he left in 2022 alongside another returning lawyer, associate Camille Abba
Vaping dispute, in which Stobbs and Brandsmiths are the representatives, tested how the UK's Human Rights Act can apply to injunctions restraining unjustified threats
An AI platform being sold for £40m, and lateral hires involving law firms Womble Bond Dickinson and Cadwell Thomas were among the top talking points
Gift this article