Italian torpedo

Last updated

The Italian Torpedo (sometimes referred to as the Belgian Torpedo [1] [2] ) is a term used in private international law to describe the act of bringing a case before a court in a state which suffers from major delays in judicial proceedings, such as Italy or Belgium, as to delay the judicial resolution of the dispute or the proceedings. [3]

The lis pendens-rule in article 29 of the Brussels I-bis Regulation (no. 1215/2012) provides that when proceedings involving the same cause of action and between the same parties are brought in the courts of different member states, all courts, other than the one first seized, must stay the proceedings until the first court seized has ruled upon its own jurisdiction. [4]

The European Court of Justice has left little possibility to counter an Italian Torpedo as it has ruled that the principle of mutual trust between the member states is of utmost importance and cannot be overridden in order to counter a torpedo. [5] [6] [7]

However, using an Italian Torpedo is excluded for matters in which a court has exclusive jurisdiction as provided in article 24 Brussels-Ibis, such as proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property, the validity of entries in public registers etc. [8]

Related Research Articles

Unitary patent Potential EU patent law

The European patent with unitary effect, more commonly known as the unitary patent, is a European patent which will benefit from unitary effect in the participating member states of the European Union. Unitary effect may be requested by the proprietor within one month of grant of a European patent, replacing validation of the European patent in the individual countries concerned. Infringement and revocation proceedings will be conducted in front of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), which decisions will have a uniform effect for the unitary patent for the participating member states as a whole rather than for each country individually. The unitary patent may be only limited, transferred or revoked, or lapse, in respect of all the participating Member States. Licensing is however to remain possible for part of the unitary territory. The unitary patent may coexist with nationally enforceable patents in the non-participating states. The unitary patent's stated aims are to make access to the patent system "easier, less costly and legally secure within the European Union" and "the creation of uniform patent protection throughout the Union".

Conflict of laws is the set of rules or laws a jurisdiction applies to a case, transaction, or other occurrence that has connections to more than one jurisdiction. This body of law deals with three broad topics: jurisdiction, rules regarding when it is appropriate for a court to hear such a case; foreign judgments, dealing with the rules by which a court in one jurisdiction mandates compliance with a ruling of a court in another jurisdiction; and choice of law, which addresses the question of which substantive laws will be applied in such a case. These issues can arise in any private-law context, but they are especially prevalent in contract law and tort law.

European Court of Justice Supreme court in the European Union, part of the Court of Justice of the European Union

The European Court of Justice, formally just the Court of Justice, is the supreme court of the European Union in matters of European Union law. As a part of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is tasked with interpreting EU law and ensuring its uniform application across all EU member states under Article 263 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

European Patent Office One of the two organs of the European Patent Organisation

The European Patent Office (EPO) is one of the two organs of the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg), the other being the Administrative Council. The EPO acts as executive body for the organisation while the Administrative Council acts as its supervisory body as well as, to a limited extent, its legislative body. The actual legislative power to revise the European Patent Convention lies with the Contracting States themselves when meeting at a Conference of the Contracting States.

European Patent Convention International patent treaty

The European Patent Convention (EPC), also known as the Convention on the Grant of European Patents of 5 October 1973, is a multilateral treaty instituting the European Patent Organisation and providing an autonomous legal system according to which European patents are granted. The term European patent is used to refer to patents granted under the European Patent Convention. However, a European patent is not a unitary right, but a group of essentially independent nationally enforceable, nationally revocable patents, subject to central revocation or narrowing as a group pursuant to two types of unified, post-grant procedures: a time-limited opposition procedure, which can be initiated by any person except the patent proprietor, and limitation and revocation procedures, which can be initiated by the patent proprietor only.

Enforcement Directive

Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights is a European Union directive in the field of intellectual property law, made under the Single Market provisions of the Treaty of Rome. The directive covers civil remedies only—not criminal ones.

The draft European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA), or formally the Draft Agreement on the establishment of a European patent litigation system, was a proposed patent law agreement aimed at creating an "optional protocol to the European Patent Convention (EPC) which would commit its signatory states to an integrated judicial system, including uniform rules of procedure and a common appeal court". It differed from the Unified Patent Court Agreement in that the EPLA negotiations were coordinated from the side of the European Patent Office, rather than from the European Council and Commission and therefore also offered the possibility for non-EU states to participate.

Forum non conveniens (FNC) is a mostly common law legal doctrine through which a court acknowledges that another forum or court where the case might have been brought is a more appropriate venue for a legal case, and transfers the case to such a forum. A change of venue might be ordered, for example, to transfer a case to a jurisdiction within which an accident or incident underlying the litigation occurred and where all the witnesses reside.

In the European Economic Area, a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) is a sui generis intellectual property (IP) right that extends the duration of certain rights associated with a patent. It enters into force after expiry of a patent upon which it is based. This type of right is available for various regulated, biologically active agents, namely human or veterinary medicaments and plant protection products. Supplementary protection certificates were introduced to encourage innovation by compensating for the long time needed to obtain regulatory approval of these products.

Brussels Regime Rules regulating jurisdiction of courts

The Brussels Regime is a set of rules regulating which courts have jurisdiction in legal disputes of a civil or commercial nature between individuals resident in different member states of the European Union (EU) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). It has detailed rules assigning jurisdiction for the dispute to be heard and governs the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.

The principle of lis alibi pendens applies both in municipal law, public international law, and private international law to address the problem of potentially contradictory judgments. If two courts were to hear the same dispute, it is possible they would reach inconsistent decisions. To avoid the problem, there are two rules.

Court of Cassation (Belgium)

The Court of Cassation of Belgium is the supreme court of the Belgian judiciary. The court is composed of thirty judges with life tenure who are nominated by the High Council of Justice of Belgium and appointed by the Belgian federal government. The court handles cases in the two main languages of Belgium, Dutch and French, and provides certain facilities for cases in German. The court is assisted in its work by a public prosecutor's office and a bar association, which both function separately from other structures. The duty of the public prosecutor's office is to provide advisory opinions to the court on how the law ought to be interpreted and applied. The attorneys of the court's bar association assist litigants in proceedings before the court; in certain cases, their assistance is mandatory.

Arbitration Method of dispute resolution

Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), is a way to resolve disputes outside the judiciary courts. The dispute will be decided by one or more persons, which renders the 'arbitration award'. An arbitration decision or award is legally binding on both sides and enforceable in the courts, unless all parties stipulate that the arbitration process and decision are non-binding.

Sources of law are the origins of laws, the binding rules that enable any state to govern its territory.

In European Union law, and especially in European intellectual property law, a cross-border injunction is an injunction by a court in one European country, such as for example a court in the Netherlands forbidding infringement in several other European countries.

A preliminary ruling is a decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the interpretation of European Union law, given in response to a request from a court or tribunal of a European Union Member State. A preliminary ruling is a final determination of EU law, with no scope for appeal. The ECJ hands down its decision to the referring court, which is then obliged to implement the ruling.

The judiciary of Poland is a collective term for all authorities exercising the judicial power of the Polish state, vested by virtue of Chapter 8 of the Constitution of Poland in courts and tribunals. As in almost all countries of continental Europe, the Polish judiciary operates within the framework of the civil law legal system.

Unified Patent Court

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is a common patent court open for participation of all member states of the European Union, and created by the "Agreement on a Unified Patent Court", which is provisionally applicable since January 19, 2022. Once the UPC Agreement will be fully in force, the UPC will hear cases regarding infringement and revocation proceedings of European patents that are valid in the participating member states. A single court ruling will be directly applicable in the member states that have ratified the UPC Agreement. The UPC Agreement was signed as an intergovernmental treaty in February 2013 by 25 states. It will enter into force on the first day of the fourth month after meeting three predefined conditions. Provisional application of the UPC Agreement was triggered on 19 January 2022 to enable preparation for the proper functioning of the court after entry into force. While the UK originally ratified the agreement, it withdrew from the UPC following Brexit.

Jurisdiction under the Brussels I Regulation

The Brussels I Regulation contains a jurisdictional regime: the rules which courts of European Union Member States use to determine if they have jurisdiction in cases with links to more than one country in the European Union. The basic principle is that the court in the member state of the party that gets sued has jurisdiction, while other grounds exist, which are diverse in content and scope, and are often classified in descending order of exclusivity and specificity. The original Brussels Regulation (44/2001) is, with regard to jurisdiction rules, very similar to the 2007 Lugano Convention, containing the same provisions with the same numbering. Numbering and certain substantial issues are different in the 2012 recast version of the Regulation, which has applied since 1 January 2015 (1215/2012).

Gasser v MISAT (C-116/02) was a decision of the European Court of Justice regarding the interpretation of the Brussels convention of 1968 ruling that a court chosen in a choice of court agreement should stay its proceedings - as any other court chosen second within the Brussels regime - until the court first seized had declared it did not have jurisdiction. The court's decision was considered problematic as it favoured the uniformity of application of the Brussels regime jurisdictional rules temporarily over party autonomy. Due to similar provisions in the 2001 Brussels Regulation and Lugano Conventions, the interpretation also affects choice of court agreements under those later instruments. However, in the 2012 Recast version of the Brussels I Regulation chosen courts can take jurisdiction, even if a court not chosen has been addressed first.

References

  1. ↑ X., "Has the Belgian torpedo sunk?", Managing IP 30 June 2000.
  2. ↑ A. NUYTS and J.-S. BERGE, International Litigation in Intellectual Property and Information Technology, Kluwer Law International, 2008, 23.
  3. ↑ J. WOOD and N. ALLAN, "Sinking the Italian torpedo: the recast Brussels Regulation", International Law Office 10 February 2012-5.
  4. ↑ G. BISELLO, C. COGNETTI and F. LO GERFO, "Deactivating the Italian Torpedo", 5.
  5. ↑ ECJ 3 April 2014, no. C-438/12, Weber v. Weber .
  6. ↑ ECJ 9 December 2003, no. C-116/02, Gasser v. MISAT.
  7. ↑ G. CUONZO, "The “Italian torpedo” never ending saga", Kluwer Patent Blog 2 September 2013.
  8. ↑ C. HEATH, Patent Enforcement Worldwide: Writings in Honour of Dieter Stauder, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015, 64.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.