I've mentioned the CJEU's decision in Bayer v. Richter several times now (see here, here, and here). Another recent discussion of the case, and of its possible impact on national law, is by Cécile Martin in PIBD No. 1126, II, 150, titled La réparation des conséquences dommageables des mesures provisoires ("Compensation for harmful consequences of provisional measures"). Ms. Martin discusses Bayer as well as previous French decisions on the compensation due when a court enters a preliminary injunction against an accused infringer, and the patent in suit is later found to be not infringed or invalid. The most notable of these was Laboratoires Negma SAS v. Biogaran SAS, Cour d'appel de Paris, Jan. 31, 2014 (previously discussed on this blog here, citing to this post on EPLaw here), in which the court awarded €3,650,000 in damages for the enforcement of a preliminary injunction of a patent later found to be invalid and for abuse of proceedings. The author concludes by noting that one may wonder whether the Bayer decision "will lead the French courts to amend their jurisprudence regarding the application of responsibility without fault to provisional measures in regard to industrial property" (my translation). What hath the CJEU wrought?
Post a Comment