Cross-border Enforcement of Patent Rights : An Analysis of the Interface Between Intellectual Property and Private International Law

This study analyzes to what extent the European rules on jurisdiction (the Brussels Convention and its successors) and the choice of law rules create an adequate framework for consolidation of cross-border disputes in one single action.

The enforcement of patent rights raises complex, and, from a private international law perspective, unique difficulties. Since intellectual property practitioners started to seek the consolidation of cross-border patent disputes, the interplay of private international rules has led to drastic changes in patent litigation across Europe. This book analyses in detail both the European rules on jurisdiction (the Brussels Convention and its successors) and the choice of law rules as they apply to cross-border patent disputes, and will be essential reading for both intellectual property lawyers and international commercial litigation specialists.At the jurisdictional stage, the basic question is whether the current jurisdictional framework provides a basis for the concentration of related litigation. For jurisdictional purposes, patent enforcement is a tort. Accordingly, cross-border patent enforcement attempts may generally be undertaken at the forum of the defendant''s domicile, the place of the tort and, as far as provisional measures are concerned, another forum with a sufficient connection to the dispute. On the other hand, the application of the current jurisdictional framework to international patent infringement disputes leads to significant difficulties such as the pre-emptive effect of proceedings pending abroad or the jurisdictional consequences of a patent validity challenge. At the choice of law stage, this book provides a comparative overview of the rather unexplored issues arising in multinational patent enforcement. De lege feranda, it seems that, in view of the territorial nature of patents, a distributive application of the law of the protecting State (lex loci protectionis) appears to be the most consistent choice of law rule.