In most patent litigation cases, the defendant's standard defence consists in challenging the validity of the plaintiff's patents, whose infringement is claimed. In this case, the defendant's counter-claim was also based on a far less usual weapon, i.e. the plaintiff's alleged abuse of dominant position through aggressive and spurious patenting policy. It must immediately be noted that in this case, the court (Tribunal de Grande Instance or TGI) has not decided on the merits of this particular counter-claim. It has decided to stay proceedings in order to seek guidance from the French competition Council (Conseil de la concurrence) on the issue of market definition and the existence of the plaintiff's alleged dominance. The opinion of the Council was published much after the case
Share on
|
|
The French Court of First Instance in Pairs is ready to welcome the defendant’s counter-claim that the plaintiff abused its alleged dominant position through aggressive and spurious patenting policy on the basis of Art. 82 EC (LuK Lamellen / Valeo)
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
