• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

2021: GER Patent Modernisation Act in force

20. August 2021

The reform and modernisation of patent law in Germany finally comes into force: the German Patent Modernisation Act entered into force on 18 August 2021. Essential are additions to § 139 PatG and § 145 PatG and the streamlining of invaldity proceedings.

Patent Modernisierungsgesetz - in Kraft 2021The Patent Modernisation Act was prepared for a long time and was already in the government’s vote in 2020 – we reported. It finally came into force on 18 August 2021. The German Patent Modernisation Act is intended to improve two aspects in particular of the current practice of patent infringement proceedings:

Proportionality of injunctive relief

With the current entry into force of the Second Patent Modernisation Act, proportionality considerations will be taken into account with regard to injunctive relief in patent disputes. For this purpose, the previous § 139 Patent Act was supplemented by the statement that the claim for injunctive relief may be limited by way of exception if, due to special circumstances in the individual case, the claim for injunctive relief would lead to disproportionate hardship for the infringer or third parties not justified by the exclusive right.

Analogously, a similar passage was also drafted as law for utility models, as an amendment to 3 24 Utility Model Act.

With regard to the practical implementation of this legal innovation, the next judgments remain to be seen with interest. Up to now, German courts have regarded a restriction of the right to injunctive relief as an absolute exception.

End of Injunction Gap?

For long, there have been expectations from many sides to end the so-called “Injunction Gap” in Germany between patent infringement and invalidity proceedings, if possible. This refers to the sometimes very long time of nullity proceedings before the Federal Patent Court (BPatG), because until now the court set a date for oral proceedings and this could be tactically protracted.

The Patent Modernisation Act § 83 PatG therefore introduces a time limit within which the BPatG must issue its reference order to the infringement court: this must be done within 6 months. For this purpose, the Federal Patent Court is authorised to disregard arguments of the parties received after the expiry of the time limit for the reference decision.

Revocation and further processing of supplementary protection certificates

In addition, the Patent Modernisation Act legally establishes the revocation and further processing of supplementary protection certificates, as it has already been done in practice: supplementary protection certificates can be revoked upon request of the holder under Sec. 64 Patent Act and that the procedural institute of further processing (§ 123a Patent Act) also applies to supplementary protection certificates (§ 16a (2) Patent Act).

Business secret in court proceedings: new § 145a PatG

Finally, the Patent Modernisation Act added the second sentence of the new § 145a Patent Act, according to which all information introduced into the proceedings may be classified as trade secrets. Although § 145a PatG also provides for exceptions (namely independent evidence proceedings and compulsory licensing proceedings), it can be assumed that, especially in independent evidence proceedings, the opposing party will not have automatic access to all information obtained during the inspection at the defendant’s premises.

Sources:

Bundesgesetzblatt vom 17. August 2021

Image:

ID 249 | pixabay | CCO License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconPatent Law Tag icon§ 139 PatG,  2021,  adaptions 2021,  August 2021,  business secrets,  Court proceedings,  German Patent Act,  German patent law,  Injunction claims,  Injunction claims patent proceedings,  Injunction gap,  invalidity,  Invalidity proceeding,  Patent Act,  Patent Act modernised,  patent invalidity,  patent law,  Patent Modernisation Act,  proportionality,  Reform German Patent Act,  Second Patent Modernisation Act,  Streamlining nullity proceedings

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Patent Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

22. February 2022
PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

8. February 2022
Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

3. February 2022
PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

1. February 2022
Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

19. January 2022
Computer Data identification declared invalid

Computer Data identification declared invalid

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.