Elftal Duitse octrooizaken
Hieronder een overzicht van een elftal recent gepubliceerde uitspraken in Duitse procedures, KluwerPatentBlog.
Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 19 February 2013, Kluwer Patent Blog (Wundverband)
 by Anja Petersen Hoffmann Eitle , for Kluwer Patent Cases. If the patentee has granted an exclusive license after filing an infringement action, an exclusive licensee is (in part) a legal successor of the patentee. Therefore, as long as the patentee’s claims are pending at another German court, the exclusive licensee has no right to sue with regard to the same subject matter due to the force of res judicata of the judgment against the legal successor and the lis pendens rule. The final decision against the patentee will have binding effect against the licensee as well.
Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 15 January 2013, Kluwer Patent Blog (Messelektronik fuer Coriolisdurchflussmesser)
 
by   Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. The Federal Court of Justice   held that under the specific circumstances of the case it was likely   that a service manual regarding flow meter technology had been available   to third parties. The Court considered as decisive the agreement   between the party supplying the manual and the recipient. According to   the Court it is relevant whether the parties agreed upon confidentiality   either expressly or implicitly or whether it was to be expected under   the circumstances that the recipient would keep the information   confidential.
Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 5 February 2013, Kluwer Patent Blog (Genveraenderungen)
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. According to the law on  employee inventions, the inventor is entitled to information about all  income generated by the employer from third parties in exploiting the  invention. This information is the basis for claims of the employees  against the employer for compensation. The Court confirmed the decisions  of the lower courts and held that the income of the employer comprises  all financial benefits related to the employees’ invention and its  exploitation. This includes not only payments made to the employer but  also other benefits such as patent protection.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 18 December 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Doppelvertretung im Nichtigkeitsverfahren) 
 by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. Regarding the question  whether costs for double representation of a party by a patent attorney  and an attorney-at-law are reimbursable the Court held that these costs  are to be reimbursed at least in a situation where parallel infringement  proceedings concerning the same patent are pending before a civil court  and in which the same party or an affiliate of that party is involved.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 19 July 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Take Five)
 by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. In an earlier decision (BGH  M2Trade), the Court held that the termination of the main license  agreement does not automatically lead to a termination of the  sublicense. It remains in force when the main license is terminated for  reasons such as a mutual agreement of the main licensor and the main  licensee who is also the sub-licensor. The Court applied this principle  in the present case in which the license was exclusive. According to the  Court, the interests of the sub-licensee were to prevail over the  interests of the main licensor.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 19 July 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (M2Trade)
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. Although the right of the  main licensee to use the invention automatically fell back to the  licensor upon the licensee’s insolvency, the Court held that the  sublicensee enjoys protection of succession and that the sublicense  continued to exist despite the termination of the main license. 
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 24 July 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Leflunomide)
 
by  Thorsten Bausch Hoffmann Eitle and Bernd Kröger, Kluwer Patent Blog. A combination of two  pharmaceutical ingredients, i.e. leflunomide and teriflunomide is to be  considered obvious if the person skilled in the art uses an obvious  process to obtain leflunomide that automatically results in – even with a  certain delay – both components due to a chemical reaction.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 23 October 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Sachverstaendigenablehnung VI)
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. The Court held that a lack of  impartiality of a court-appointed expert can be assumed if the expert  maintains a close economic relationship with one of the parties. This is  not necessarily so where the expert was engaged by a third party that  maintains a consulting relationship with one of the parties.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 20 November 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Fuehrungsschiene)
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. This decision deals with a  court order to obtain an expert opinion in a nullity appeal proceeding  subject to the new procedural rules that apply to nullity actions filed  since October 1, 2009. Due to revised rules in nullity appeal  proceedings, as a general rule, the appeal court shall decide on legal  questions only, and not questions of fact such as expert opinions.  However, the Court held that regarding facts relevant for novelty or  inventive step it, the appointment of a court expert to clarify the  factual background is still admissible, even if the relevant facts were  already a subject in the first instance proceedings.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 28 August 2012, Kluwer Patent Blog (Fahrzeugwechselstromgenerator)
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. The Appeals Court held that  an argument that was not raised in first instance proceedings, shall not  be considered a new matter, and consequently be dismissed, if it only  further specifies or clarifies the line of argumentation in first  instance. On the other hand, f the plaintiff refers to the specifics of a  technical teaching disclosed in prior art for the first time at the  appeal stage in order to support a nullity attack, it shall be  considered a new matter, even if this prior art was already filed in  first instance.
 
 Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 13 November 2011, Kluwer Patent Blog (Diglycidverbindung (Diglycidyl Compounds))
 
by  Jochen Buehling , for Kluwer Patent Cases. Under the doctrine of  equivalents, a patent does not convey protection for all options  disclosed in the broader patent description if these options are not  specifically included in the patent claims.

Gemeenschapsmerk. Vorm/kleurmerk (vgl. oranje sokkenpunten, 


Mediarecht. Als randvermelding. Omroep Brabant heeft onrechtmatig gehandeld jegens Stichting Addictioncare met de publicatie van onjuiste en door onvolledigheid misleidende gegevens van feitelijke aard. Stichting Addictioncare heeft er belang bij dat zo spoedig mogelijk aan dat onrechtmatige handelen een einde komt en dus wordt Omroep Brabant veroordeeld tot verwijdering van de onjuiste publicaties en openbaarmaking van 
De Europese Commissie heeft op 24 april 2013 het Groenboek “Voorbereiding op een volledig geconvergeerde audiovisuele wereld: Groei, creatie en waarden” gepubliceerd. De Commissie heeft daarbij alle belanghebbenden verzocht voor 31 augustus 2013 te reageren. Nederland stelt het op prijs dat de Europese Commissie dit Groenboek heeft gepubliceerd en maakt graag gebruik van de gelegenheid om haar visie te presenteren.
Prejudiciële vragen gesteld door Eparchiako Dikastirio Lefkosias, Cyprus.
Conclusie ingezonden door Arnout Groen, 
Uitspraak ingezonden door Tobias Cohen Jehoram en Robbert Sjoerdsma, 
Incident. EEX. Relatieve bevoegdheid rechter. Wetsgeschiedenis wijst Haagse rechtbank aan.