Search results for

The European Commission has proposed a “suggested solution” for a unitary patent court in the EU, which addresses objections raised by the EU Court of Justice

Since the start of the BEST programme (Bringing Examination and Search Together) oral proceedings in examination and opposition can be held both in The Hague and in Munich, whereas formerly these proceedings could only be performed in Munich. The Technical Board of Appeal has recently issued two decisions on the question of whether a party's request to conduct oral proceedings in Munich instead of in The Hague can be denied. In T0933/10, the original request was refused by the examining division. On appeal, the Board said that the examining division did not provide any reasons for its decision. Also, the arguments of the applicant were not dealt with by the examination division. Therefore, the Board decided that a substantial procedural violation had taken place and that the appeal fee should be reimbursed. The case was remitted to the examining division to enable issuing a new decision (with motivation). However, the Board did not indicate that the applicant's request regarding the venue of oral proceedings should be allowed.

A significant number of developing economies have, of late, mustered up the courage to antagonise multinational pharmaceutical companies by issuing compulsory licences. The rationale for this is concern over the public health. As is well recognised, compulsory licences are effective instruments to provide access to expensive drugs. It is interesting to note the overlap between compulsory licensing and data exclusivity. Although these are two distinct concepts, the former may be considered an exception to the latter.

Preparations for the trade mark opposition procedure in Italy are in full swing.

Protection of a crop variety is a special protection given by the state – in this case is represented by the government with implementation in the hands of the Office of Plant Variety Protection – to plant varieties developed by breeders through their breeding activities.

OHIM officially started its review of service standards under its new Strategic Plan yesterday, but processing times for designs have already improved rapidly.

Tea Board, India v ITC Limited may be the first case on infringement of a registered geographical indication (GI) to be decided by an Indian Court. The Calcutta High Court denied an interim injunction to the Tea Board of India, the registered proprietor of the GI, Darjeeling. The Tea Board sued ITC, inter alia, under the Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act 1999, for infringement of its registered GI against the use of the name "Darjeeling Lounge, alleging such use amounted to an act of unfair competition including passing off.

Canadian lawyers expressed relief following the Supreme Court’s decision in Masterpiece v Alavida Lifestyles, which they said could have jeopardised long-held trade mark principles

Although the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines has won praise for its attempts to reduce counterfeit selling in shopping malls, doubts remain about how effective the campaign will be in the long term

Cameron Andrews, Gilbert + Tobin