The court considered a reference to the European Court on assumed facts where the domestic court had not yet established those facts.
Europa In the present state of Community law, characterized by the absence of harmonization of the patents legislation of the Member States, and in the absence of international conventions in force providing to the contrary, Article 36 of the Treaty must be interpreted as not precluding the application of a Member State’s legislation which recognizes the principle of relative novelty and provides that a patent granted for an invention may not be declared invalid by reason only of the fact that the invention in question appears in a patent specification filed more than 50 years previously. Where national law normally provides for the issue of an injunction to prevent any infringement, that measure is justified under Article 36 in so far as it aims to preserve the actual substance of the patent right.
Citations:
C-35/87, R-35/87, [1988] EUECJ R-35/87, [1987] 3 CMLR 266
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Attridge Law (A Firm of Solicitors) v Coleman and Law EAT 20-Dec-2006
The claimant asserted associative disability discrimination. She was the carer for her disabled son.
Held: To succeed the claimant would have to show that associative discrimination was prohibited by the directive and that the 1995 Act could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134565