ECJ Endorses Interim Cross-Border Injunctions In Patent Cases

On 12 July 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("ECJ") confirmed the admissibility of interim cross-border injunctions in patent disputes under limited conditions. It did so in a preliminary ruling clarifying the provisions of Council Regulation 44/2001 on the jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the "Brussels I Regulation").

The case before the ECJ pitted Solvay against two Belgian entities and one Dutch entity of the Honeywell Group ("Honeywell"). Solvay had initiated infringement proceedings against Honeywell before the District Court of The Hague claiming that Honeywell had infringed national parts of Solvay's European patent. Solvay sought to obtain an interim injunction with cross-border effect until a decision on the merits of the case was taken. In its defence, Honeywell, counterclaimed that the respective national parts of Solvay's European patent were invalid.

In these circumstances, the District Court sought a preliminary ruling from the ECJ on the interpretation of Article 6 (1), Article 22 (4) and Article 31 of the Brussels I Regulation. The ECJ followed the reasoning of its Advocate General (See, VBB on Belgian Business Law, Volume 2012, No. 4, pp. 6-7, available at www.vbb.com) thereby opening the door for cross-border injunctions that some thought it had closed in earlier case law (See, cases C-4/03, GAT v. Luk and C-539/03, Roche v. Primus).

The first question before the ECJ related to Article 6 (1) of the Brussels I Regulation, which states that defendants domiciled in different Member States may be sued in one of the Member States when the claims are closely connected in order to prevent irreconcilable judgments. The ECJ ruled that irreconcilable judgments are likely to result when separate proceedings are carried against defendants from different Member States that are separately...