This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CA0044
Case C-44/21: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I — Germany) — Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG v HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Directive 2004/48/EC — Article 9(1) — European patent — Interim measures — Power of national judicial authorities to issue an interlocutory injunction to prevent an imminent infringement of an intellectual property right — National case-law dismissing applications for interim measures where the validity of the patent in question has not been confirmed, at the very least, by a decision given at first instance in opposition or invalidity proceedings — Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
Case C-44/21: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I — Germany) — Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG v HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Directive 2004/48/EC — Article 9(1) — European patent — Interim measures — Power of national judicial authorities to issue an interlocutory injunction to prevent an imminent infringement of an intellectual property right — National case-law dismissing applications for interim measures where the validity of the patent in question has not been confirmed, at the very least, by a decision given at first instance in opposition or invalidity proceedings — Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
Case C-44/21: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I — Germany) — Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG v HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Directive 2004/48/EC — Article 9(1) — European patent — Interim measures — Power of national judicial authorities to issue an interlocutory injunction to prevent an imminent infringement of an intellectual property right — National case-law dismissing applications for interim measures where the validity of the patent in question has not been confirmed, at the very least, by a decision given at first instance in opposition or invalidity proceedings — Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
OJ C 237, 20.6.2022, p. 14–14
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
20.6.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 237/14 |
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I — Germany) — Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG v HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG
(Case C-44/21) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Directive 2004/48/EC - Article 9(1) - European patent - Interim measures - Power of national judicial authorities to issue an interlocutory injunction to prevent an imminent infringement of an intellectual property right - National case-law dismissing applications for interim measures where the validity of the patent in question has not been confirmed, at the very least, by a decision given at first instance in opposition or invalidity proceedings - Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
(2022/C 237/17)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Landgericht München I
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG
Defendants: HARTING Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Harting Electric GmbH & Co. KG
Operative part of the judgment
Article 9(1) of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights must be interpreted as precluding national case-law under which applications for interim relief for patent infringement must, in principle, be dismissed where the validity of the patent in question has not been confirmed, at the very least, by a decision given at first instance in opposition or invalidity proceedings.