The overwhelming success of last year’s retreat on “the hindsight bias” encourages us to invite again academics, judges and practitioners from all over the world to discuss another fundamental topic of intellectual property law:
Is there or should there be room for a balance of interest analysis before the issuance of an injunction, or are injunctions to be granted unless the requirements for compulsory licensing are met? What are the alternatives?
For a long time the general opinion in Europe had been that an infringement of an IP right automatically entails the right to injunctive relief. Only recently did the principle of proportionality (“Verhältnismässigkeit”) emerge in black letter law (EU Enforcement Directive) and case law (German Federal Court of Justice: Wärmetauscher [X ZR 114/13]). The specter of pan-European injunctions granted by the Unified Patent Court in every case of infringement haunts some.
The Common Law principle of equity makes the grant of a permanent injunction conditional on the showing of irreparable harm, the inadequacy of other remedies, a balance of hardships and the consideration of public interest (U.S. Supreme Court: eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006)).
We will be focusing on the remedies not only in patent law but also discuss injunctive relief based on other intellectual property rights. We will consider (permanent and temporary) injunctions in a doctrinal framework, learn about the economic implications, discover how various national legal systems are handling injunctive relief, look at specific industries and finish with a case-study, while giving sufficient time for discussion.
You may please note that the number of participants is limited.