Art. 22(4) Brussels i regulation and its successoronly only apply to cases concerned with the actual registration or validityof the listed ip rights. Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 5 october 2017, c-341/16
Keywords:
Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters, Brussels I Regulation (No. 44/2001), Jurisdiction under Art. 2(1) and Art. 22(4) Brussels I Regulation, jurisdiction in proceedings concerned with IP rights, registration of property of a trade mark
Abstract
The CJEU reaffirms its established case law on Art. 22(4) Brussels I Regulation (No. 44/2001) and interprets the provision narrowly. Courts in member states in which patents, trade marks, designs, or similar rights that are required to be deposited or registered, have jurisdiction only in cases that are actually concerned with the registration or validity of these IP rights. A case concerned with the potential ownership of such rights falls within the general provision of Art. 2(1) Brussels I and, therefore, is to be brought before courts in the member state where the defendant is domiciled.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Abstract Views: 560
PDF
: 772
Published
2019-03-11
How to Cite
Sendlmeier, K. (2019). Art. 22(4) Brussels i regulation and its successoronly only apply to cases concerned with the actual registration or validityof the listed ip rights. Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 5 october 2017, c-341/16. CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL, 11(1), 937-944. https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2019.4668
Issue
Section
Varia
Se permite que los autores de los trabajos de investigación publicados en la Revista los reproduzcan en otros sitios siempre que se haga mención de que han sido previamente publicados en Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional (CDT).
