Greece: Parallel imports ruling raises questions
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: Parallel imports ruling raises questions

In a recent case relating to a product (a medical device) that treats coughs, some interesting issues were raised regarding parallel imports, repackaging and unfair competition.

The Greek distributor of this product brought a preliminary injunction (PI) action against a parallel importer of the same product that was imported from another EU member state. The defendant had attached its name and a summary of useful information to a label on the package of the product and, additionally, it had inserted a leaflet within the package containing the product's critical information in the Greek language. The action was based on unfair competition rules rather than on trade mark law.

The PI judge ruled that there is no unfair competition on the part of the defendant as the information, either attached or inserted, was necessary for the product's launch on to the Greek market. However, the PI judge did not further consider whether the defendant's above-mentioned actions constitute "repackaging" as defined by the EU case law regarding exhaustion of trade mark rights.

According to the Greek unfair competition rules, any purposeful competitive act that runs contrary to public morals is prohibited. In that sense, if the defendant's above-mentioned acts were to be found to be an impermissible "repackaging", this might well mean that they constitute an act running contrary to public morals, even if trade mark protection is not directly invoked.

Notably, the PI judge dismissed the trade mark owner's intervention filed in favour of the claimant by ruling that the trade mark owner should have chosen a procedural remedy under which an independent protection against the defendant would have been sought.

It seems that this judgment is not free from difficulties, which are anyway frequently present in parallel imports cases. It is certain though that a coughing out ruling does not help legal clarity.

Manolis Metaxakis

Patrinos & Kilimiris

7, Hatziyianni Mexi Str.

GR-11528 Athens

Greece

Tel: +30210 7222906, 7222050

Fax: +30210 7222889

info@patrinoskilimiris.com

www.patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Justin Davidson and Stanley Ng of Norton Rose Fulbright discuss what China’s recent Ultraman ruling does and doesn’t say about who is responsible when an AI system infringes copyright
Former in-house counsel reveal how consultancy work helped them win new business and how they cut through the stigma surrounding the job title
In-house counsel discuss the law firm billing practices that will win them over and the ones that drive them away
If the deal goes through, one group will manage more than 50% of patent filings in Australia and employ more than a quarter of patent attorneys in Australia and New Zealand
Siegmund Gutman, former chair of the life sciences patent group at Proskauer, is among a group of 10 lawyers to join Mintz Levin
A patent dispute between two manufacturing companies has shown that teething problems with the UPC’s case management system have not abated
Lawyers weigh in on the USPTO’s request for comment on the effects of AI on prior art analysis and obviousness determinations
A vast majority of corporates – especially smaller businesses – rely on a trusted referral when instructing external counsel, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The Munich Regional Court ruled that Lenovo was an unwilling licensee and had engaged in ‘holdout’ tactics
Gift this article