Small claims, big issues

The IPKat has been mewsing over a RAPID press release from the Commission entitled "Council adopts common position concerning Regulation establishing a European Small Claims Procedure". In relevant part this press release reads:

"The Council adopted today its common position concerning a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Small Claims Procedure. The aim of the Regulation is to simplify, speed up and reduce the costs of litigation concerning small claims by establishing a European Small Claims Procedure to be available to citizens as an alternative to the procedures existing under the laws of the Member States. ...

Right: the Council has also proposed a Small Clams Court, to deal with non-identical infringements. This should suit litigants on a tight budget, who don't want to shell out too much money.

* The procedure will apply in civil and commercial matters where the value of a claim does not exceed 2000 €. The procedure applies to pecuniary claims as well as to non-pecuniary claims.

* In order to reduce costs and delays, the European Small Claims Procedure provides for several procedural simplifications, introducing standard forms to be used by the parties and the court and establishing time limits for the parties and for the court in order to simplify and speed up litigation concerning small claims.

* The procedure shall be a written procedure, unless an oral hearing is considered necessary by the court. The court may hold a hearing or take evidence through a video conference or other communications technology if the technical means are available.

* Moreover, the parties shall not be required to be represented by a lawyer or another legal professional and the court shall determine the means of taking evidence and the extent of the evidence necessary for its judgment under the rules applicable to the admissibility of evidence. It may admit the taking of evidence through written statements of witnesses, experts or parties.

Left: costs will be kept low

* The unsuccessful party shall bear the costs of the proceedings. However, the court shall not award costs to the successful party to the extent that they were unnecessarily incurred or disproportionate to the claim.

* The judgment shall be enforceable notwithstanding any possible appeal. The provision of a security shall not be required.

* Finally, the Regulation abolishes the intermediate measures to enable the recognition and enforcement of a judgement given in a European Small Claims Procedure. A judgment shall be recognised and enforced in another Member State automatically and without any possibility of opposing its recognition.

The new procedure will apply from 1 January 2009".

What the IPKat wants to know is how this proposal will affect intellectual property disputes. The assumption has always been that IP matters are big stuff, to be heard in specialist courts where possible. But IP litigation has always been big and costly simply because there has been nowhere cheap and easy for litigants to go. Merpel says, I don't recall the term "small claims" cropping up in the IP Enforcement Directive 2004/48 ...
Small claims, big issues Small claims, big issues Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, July 23, 2007 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.