HUNGARY Law and Practice Contributed by: Árpád Pethő, Levente Pethő, Eszter Szakács and József Tálas, Danubia Patent & Law Office
If the circumstances that gave rise to the pre- liminary injunction change, the defendant may request the injunction to be lifted and the court will decide on the request, evaluating whether or not the change of circumstances justifies the lifting of the injunction. If the preliminary injunc- tion is lifted, the injunction defendant may seek appropriate compensation from the plaintiff. One relevant Hungarian court case gave rise to judgment in Case C-688/17 (Bayer), which inter- preted Article 9(7) of Directive 2004/48/EC on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights. Ex parte preliminary injunctions are also made available by the law in the event of urgency, such as the threat of irreparable harm. However, as far as is known, the court has never decided on a preliminary injunction request in ex parte pro- ceedings in patent cases. Instead, preliminary injunction requests have always been served on the defendant. Nevertheless, in trade secret cases, preliminary injunctions have already been granted in ex parte procedures. 2.8 Protection for Potential Opponents It is not possible to file a protective letter with the court in Hungary, although potential opponents may commence proceedings for non-infringe- ment. If sued in a preliminary injunction proceed- ing, the opponent may also request the court to make a bond the condition of the preliminary injunction entering into effect; the amount of the bond is subject to the arguments of the parties. Very often, when a revocation action is pend- ing, the court determines the bond based on the expected profit loss of the defendant for the duration of the revocation proceedings. Accord- ing to the rules of the CCP, the bond shall be automatically transferred to the defendant if the court dismisses the petition of the plaintiff for the declaration of the infringement. If infringement
is declared in the judgment, the bond shall be returned to the plaintiff. 2.9 Special Limitation Provisions There is no special limitation period for IP mat- ters; the general five-year limitation applies for all civil law claims. However, judicial prac- tice confirms that the right to remedies, such as declaration of infringement and cease-and- desist orders, is tied to the ownership character of registered IP rights, and thus such claims do not apply. If the plaintiff is unable to start an action for a reason that is not their fault, the limitation period is stayed. Also, there are certain acts that inter- rupt the limitation period and cause it to restart, such as the initiation of a lawsuit if it is con- cluded on the merits. Importantly, a mere warn- ing letter does not interrupt the limitation period. 2.10 Mechanisms to Obtain Evidence and Information Possibilities for obtaining information in patent infringement lawsuits are mostly made available in the context of Directive 2004/48/EC on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, as well as the Hungarian Patent Act’s earlier har- monisation with the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS). The right to information from the defendant is available as part of a preliminary or final injunc- tion. In this context, the court may order the defendant to provide information on the quanti- ties of the infringing products, sales information and information about commercial partners. The same order can be obtained against parties who possess infringing products or have obtained or provided services relating to the infringement on a commercial scale.
207 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook