Category: European

Duijnstee v Goderbauer: ECJ 15 Nov 1983

There was a dispute between an inventor and the liquidator of a company concerning ownership of patents. The liquidator’s claim was that under Dutch law the inventions had been made on terms that the patents ought to belong to the company. He demanded that the inventor should be ordered to transfer not only the Dutch patent, but also the corresponding patents in 22 other countries, including five which had adhered to the Brussels Convention.
Held: To make the order would not violate Article 16(4) of the Convention. The validity of the patents was not being challenged. Nor was the conduct of the various national authorities whose business it was to keep the patent registers. Nor was the liquidator seeking an order directing those authorities to rectify their registers in the light of Dutch law. Instead, the liquidator was asking for an order which would have required the inventor himself to apply to rectify the registers: an order in personam.

Citations:

C-288/82, [1983] ECR 3663

Cited by:

Cited – R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2) ChD 12-May-2004
A logo had been created for the claimants, by an independent sub-contractor. They sought assignment of their legal title, but, knowing of the claimant’s interest the copyright was assigned to a third party out of the jurisdiction. The claimant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.133530

Charles Lux v Court of Auditors of the European Communities: ECJ 13 Dec 1984

Europa 1. Officials – recruitment – appointment to the starting grade – exception authorized by the staff regulations – application by means of a general decision – discretionary power of the administration – limits – no discretion allowed (staff regulations of officials, arts. 5 (3) and 31 (2) (b)) 2.Measures adopted by the institutions – internal directive – rule of conduct indicating the practice to be followed – legal force as regards the administration (staff regulations of officials, art. 5 (3))

  1. Where an exception, authorized by the staff regulations, to the general rule governing appointments is introduced in the form of a general decision adopted within an institution, the principle that there should be no discrimination between officials in any one category at the time of their recruitment, laid down by the staff regulations, would be deprived of any legal significance if in such a case the appointing authority still had the same discretion as is conferred upon it to lay down exceptions to the aforementioned general rule.
  2. The court has held on numerous occasions that the principle of equality of treatment laid down by the staff regulations is of fundamental importance in the law relating to the employment of community officials. Thus, although an internal directive does not have the character of a rule of law which the administration is bound to observe, it nevertheless lays down a rule of conduct indicating the practice to be followed, from which the administration may not depart without giving the reasons which have led it to do so, since otherwise the aforesaid principle would be infringed.

Citations:

C-129/82

European, Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.133432