STOCKHOLM REGIONAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Peter Kenamets, Fredrik Lüning and Linnéa Hedström, Lind Edlund Kenamets Intellectual Property AB
evidence, and withdrawal of both the infringe - ment action and counterclaim without a cost decision. • Texport v Sioen (EP 2 186 428) – the Division has addressed questions concerning jurisdic - tion and/or competence in light of parallel national court proceedings. • Viking v Stanley Black & Decker (EP 3 953 541) – issues addressed include joint liability for infringement, leave to submit further writ - ten pleadings, and confidentiality of personal information contained in submissions. • Imbox v Brunngård (EP 2 276 862) – the Divi - sion has considered an application to pre - serve evidence (saisie), inspection of property, and reimbursement of legal costs following the withdrawal of an application • Meril v Erik Krahbichler – the case involved an application for a cost decision in connection with a request for access to court documents. • Fapa Vital v Valentis – the Division addressed an application for reimbursement of court fees following the withdrawal of a request for As of the time of writing, the NBRD has not yet issued a decision on the merits in any of its pend - ing cases. This makes it difficult to discuss in detail how the Division approaches key substan - tive issues such as claim construction, infringe - ment assessment, infringement by equivalents, the test for inventive step/obviousness, added matter or insufficiency. However, as the Division is expected to hand down decisions in the near future, these questions will naturally come into sharper focus. provisional measures. 3.2 Leading Cases The publicly available documents in the cases initiated so far indicate that, in the context of infringement, the NBRD is already being con - fronted with substantive issues such as the
meaning of the term “offering”, joint liability and supply chain, the defendants’ distribution chain for the accused products, involvement of multi - ple parties in the alleged infringement, contribu - tory infringement, claim construction, doctrine of equivalence, identity of the skilled person, and proportionality and public interest as a defence against injunctive relief. In the context of validity, the Division is facing substantive questions including alternative start - ing points for the assessment of inventive step, real-world products as prior art, prior public use and added matter. 3.3 Pending Cases This is covered in 2.1 Types of Actions and 3.1 Topics Covered . 3.4 Technically Qualified Judges To date, the NBRD has appointed technically qualified judges in a total of five cases. In four of these, the appointed judges had a background in mechanical engineering. Notably, judges at the NBRD – including the technically qualified judges – appear to take a more active role during oral hearings than is typically observed in Swedish national court proceedings. Whereas judges in Swedish pan - els often adopt a more passive stance, primarily listening to the parties’ pleadings and witness testimonies, hearings before the NBRD – gener - ally shorter in duration – require a greater degree of judicial engagement throughout the proceed - ings. From a Swedish perspective, this higher level of activity is a notable shift and appears to reflect the procedural demands and format of hearings before the UPC.
128 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook