• Login
    • Advanced search
    • Title
    • Channel
    • Module
  • Home
  • Industry
    •  

      • Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services
      • Automotive
      • Consumer
      • Manufacturing and Industrials
      • Education
      • Energy and Natural Resources
      • Financial Institutions
    •  

      • Insurance
      • Life Sciences and Health Care
      • Private Capital
      • Real Estate
      • Sports, Media and Entertainment
      • Technology and Telecoms
      • Transport and Logistics
  • Practice
    • Corporate & Finance

      • Banking and Loan Finance
      • Blockchain
      • Business Restructuring and Insolvency
      • Capital Markets
      • Corporate Governance and Public Company Representation
      • Infrastructure, Energy, Resources, and Projects
      • Leveraged and Acquisition Finance
      • Mergers and Acquisitions
      • Pensions
      • Private Equity, Venture Capital and Investment Funds
      • Real Estate
      • Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)
      • Tax
      • Transfer Pricing
    • Global Regulatory

      • Administrative and Public Law
      • Antitrust and Competition
      • Communications, Internet, and Media
      • Education
      • Energy Regulatory
      • Environment and Natural Resources
      • Financial Services
      • Food Law
      • Gaming Law
      • Government Contracts and Public Procurement
      • Government Relations and Public Affairs
      • Health
      • Immigration
      • International Trade and Investment
      • Medical Device and Technology Regulatory
      • New Nuclear
      • Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Regulatory
      • Privacy and Cybersecurity
      • Space and Satellite
      • Strategic Operations, Agreements and Regulation
      • Transportation Regulatory
    • Intellectual Property

      • Copyright
      • Designs
      • Domain Names
      • IP and Technology Transactions
      • IP Enforcement
      • Patents
      • Trade Secrets and Confidential Know-how
      • Trademarks and Brands
      • Unfair Competition
    • Litigation, Arbitration, and Employment

      • Business and Human Rights
      • Construction and Engineering
      • Corporate and Securities Litigation
      • Employment
      • International Arbitration
      • Investigations, White Collar, and Fraud
      • Products Law
      • Risks, Disputes, and Litigation
  • Comparative guides
  • Engage Premium
  • Login
  • Register
Hogan Lovells Engage 5.6.14
      • Title
      • Channel
      • Module
    • Hit ENTER to search in content
    • Advanced search
    • Login
  • Home
  • Industry
    •  

      • Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services
      • Automotive
      • Consumer
      • Manufacturing and Industrials
      • Education
      • Energy and Natural Resources
      • Financial Institutions
    •  

      • Insurance
      • Life Sciences and Health Care
      • Private Capital
      • Real Estate
      • Sports, Media and Entertainment
      • Technology and Telecoms
      • Transport and Logistics
  • Practice
    • Corporate & Finance

      • Banking and Loan Finance
      • Blockchain
      • Business Restructuring and Insolvency
      • Capital Markets
      • Corporate Governance and Public Company Representation
      • Infrastructure, Energy, Resources, and Projects
      • Leveraged and Acquisition Finance
      • Mergers and Acquisitions
      • Pensions
      • Private Equity, Venture Capital and Investment Funds
      • Real Estate
      • Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)
      • Tax
      • Transfer Pricing
    • Global Regulatory

      • Administrative and Public Law
      • Antitrust and Competition
      • Communications, Internet, and Media
      • Education
      • Energy Regulatory
      • Environment and Natural Resources
      • Financial Services
      • Food Law
      • Gaming Law
      • Government Contracts and Public Procurement
      • Government Relations and Public Affairs
      • Health
      • Immigration
      • International Trade and Investment
      • Medical Device and Technology Regulatory
      • New Nuclear
      • Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Regulatory
      • Privacy and Cybersecurity
      • Space and Satellite
      • Strategic Operations, Agreements and Regulation
      • Transportation Regulatory
    • Intellectual Property

      • Copyright
      • Designs
      • Domain Names
      • IP and Technology Transactions
      • IP Enforcement
      • Patents
      • Trade Secrets and Confidential Know-how
      • Trademarks and Brands
      • Unfair Competition
    • Litigation, Arbitration, and Employment

      • Business and Human Rights
      • Construction and Engineering
      • Corporate and Securities Litigation
      • Employment
      • International Arbitration
      • Investigations, White Collar, and Fraud
      • Products Law
      • Risks, Disputes, and Litigation
  • Comparative guides
  • Engage Premium
  • Login
  • Register
  1. News
  2. 荷兰法院认可针对中国被告专利侵权案的跨境管辖权

荷兰法院认可针对中国被告专利侵权案的跨境管辖权

9 January 2020
    • Share by email
    • Share on
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • Get link
    • Get QR Code
    • Download
    • Print

2019年3月,中国手机制造商小米在荷兰组织了一场手机发布会,并预计在2019年夏季过后不久于荷兰市场上市小米手机。2019年9月,Fractus在海牙地区法院初步救济令法官席前对小米及诸多经销商提起专利侵权诉讼。Fractus所寻求的禁制令指向的地区不仅涵盖荷兰,还包括德国、西班牙及法国。在其2019年12月10日作出的裁决中,法官认定,其有权对小米及经销商作出此类跨境禁制令

跨境权限

Fractus 的诉讼对象为小米总部及其在中国的其他办事处和小米荷兰子公司,还包括诸多销售小米产品的荷兰经销商,并申请涵盖荷兰、德国、西班牙及法国四国的跨境禁制令。

法官根据既定的案例法,认定其对荷兰实体(在本案中为小米的荷兰子公司及当地荷兰经销商)具有跨境管辖权(《布鲁塞尔I法规》第4条)。法官随后认定,其对小米的中国实体亦具有跨境管辖权(《荷兰民事诉讼法》第7条)。所有实体涉嫌直接侵害Fractus在上述国家(即荷兰、德国、西班牙及法国)的专利。经参考欧盟法院2012年7月12日对Honeywell v. Solvay一案的裁决,法官认定各案件之间存在相同的事实及法律情形,如果案件不一同审理,将导致各判决各自为营之风险。法官认为该案亦达到了在荷兰起诉各公司的要件。荷兰小米子公司是小米集团旗下的荷兰法定机构,而诸多分销商在合约上与小米有关联。尽管各实体在该供应链中各履其职,他们共同构成小米手机的同一供应链。最后,法官还基于同样的原因认定了其对奥地利某分销商的跨境管辖权(《布鲁赛尔I法规》第7、8条)。

紧迫性

法官进一步认定,由于案情紧迫,该案须通过初步救济令法律程序审理。原则上,如果侵权是持续性的,则认可案情的紧迫性。但是,如果原告行事不够迅速,则可能表明原告的利益不需要初步禁制令来保护。

2019年3月28日,小米举行了发布会,宣布其将进入比荷卢联盟市场。此后不久,小米在其网站上添加了荷兰相关网页。在此之前,虽然平行进口商确实在荷兰出售产品,但小米并不在荷兰市场上销售产品;其在2019年夏季后不久才出售其首批产品。Fractus行动迅速,在2019年9月下旬便对小米提起诉讼,这距其在发布会期间了解到有侵权危险还不到六个月。对其他司法管辖区与侵权相关的充分紧迫性问题,法官并未作出裁决。

利益权衡

为权衡利益起见,法官考虑到了Fractus的专利将在裁决后一个月届满,而小米的手机早已上市。法官认定,计算Fractus在该阶段的损害赔偿金是相对直接的,因其可以将小米的营业额作为依据。在不公平禁制令的情形下计算小米的损害赔偿金便复杂多了。这意味着法官认为如果情况不是这样的话,Fractus证明侵权的门槛似乎就要高多了。

由于法官初步评定小米手机并不属于Fractus与填充微型天线有关的专利保护范围,因此其最终并未签发禁制令。

评语

该裁决表明,荷兰法院在初步法律程序中,不仅有意审理针对荷兰被告的专利侵权索赔;且如有荷兰被告参与其中,其亦愿意审理针对外国被告、涉及同一专利在外国侵权的专利侵权索赔。这以欧盟法院在Honeywell v. Solvay一案中的裁决为依据,且亦符合荷兰法院的在先裁决。

 

作者Ruud van der Velden

Contacts
Ruud van der Velden
Partner
Amsterdam
Helen Xia
Partner
Beijing
Related Materials
shutterstock_556126882

Dutch Court accepts cross-border competence in patent infringement case against Chinese defendants

Keywords Fractus, Xiaomi, cross-border infringement, cross-border competence, jurisdiction, urgency, balancing interests
Languages 中文
Topics Patents, IP Enforcement
Countries People's Republic of China, Netherlands
Delete Comment ?

Are you sure want to delete comment ?

Get link
Embed
Share by email
Get QR Code

Scan this QR Code to share this content