Search results for

The amendment of the Norwegian Customs Act section 39, which was implemented as of September 1 2007, makes it possible for the Customs authorities to notify owners of IP rights if there is probable and reasonable cause to believe that the imported goods are infringing the IP rights. Customs may with this amendment ex officio retain suspected goods for five days and thus give an IP owner the possibility to take action. Before this amendment, it was necessary to obtain an interlocutory injunction from a court in order to enable the Customs to retain suspect goods. The amendment creates a new and better instrument in the battle to fight piracy and counterfeits, making it easier to enforce IP rights. The Norwegian Patent Office will assist the Customs to identify the IP owners, enabling them to notify correctly.

A number of legislative changes in Irish data protection law have already taken effect and further developments are due to take effect in October 2007. These developments provide some welcome clarification for practitioners.

To date, UK businesses have had to consider two parallel systems for registered design rights: the UK registered design right under the Registered Designs Act 1949 (as amended) and the Community registered design right under EC Directive 6/2002/EC (the Community Designs Regulation). However, on September 24 2007, the European Community signed the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement concerning the international registration of industrial designs, creating a third layer of registered design right protection. The UK had not previously been a signatory to the Hague Agreement, and so this is the first time that the Hague Agreement will apply to the UK, the EU implementing legislation (Commission Regulation 876/2007, amending Regulation 6/2002/EC ) being directly applicable in EU member states.

Supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) as provided by Regulation 1768/92/EEC can extend the lifetime of a patent protecting medicines up to five years. SPCs were devised to compensate for the reduced duration of these patents caused by the lengthy procedures involved in obtaining marketing authorization before the launch of a new medicinal product.

The government of Croatia adopted a new regulation on August 8 2007 to amend Customs measures relating to goods suspected of infringing particular IP rights.

In a recent decision, the Austrian Supreme Court clarified certain aspects of the legitimacy of addressing warning letters to employees. In the case, an interim injunction was granted to the defendant against the claimant's "sales manager Austria". As the claimant had no place of business in Austria, but sold infringing coffee machines via its Austrian distributors, the defendant felt impelled to warn the employees of the claimant who were actively participating in the distribution of the infringing coffee machines in Austria that an accomplice or assistant is also liable for patent infringement.

Originator drugs companies who want to obtain an injunction against well-advised makers of generics need to hone their strategies. Liz Lawson and John Hannebery of Davies Collison Cave Solicitors explain how

Many IP practitioners believe that the High Court's ruling in Lockwood v Doric has made it harder to invalidate patents in Australia. But that's not the whole story, say Rebekah Gay and Paul Harrison of Shelston IP

Interlocutory injunctions are an important part of any litigant’s armoury. Here, Peter Chalk of Blake Dawson explains the options available to IP owners in the Australian courts

The Australian government passed a series of amendments to the Trade Marks Act in October 2006. Brett Lewis and Sally Foreman of Davies Collison Cave explain how these changes affect trade mark prosecution