tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post8370953234657988655..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Can a CJEU ruling on the European system of central banks pave the way towards an even greater impact of CJEU IP rulings?Verónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65525371178595793462019-03-19T17:16:50.699+00:002019-03-19T17:16:50.699+00:00In my opinion the judgment Rimsevics, C‑202/18 an...In my opinion the judgment Rimsevics, C‑202/18 and C‑238/18 cannot be extrapolated to other fields such as IP, because it's based on an entirelly exceptional provision, Article 14.2 of the Statute of the ESCB and of the ECB, as the Court reiterated in paras 69-77, in particular in para 71 stating that " Article 14.2 ...adds a legal remedy to the system of legal remedies laid down by the Treaties which is very specific, as is apparent from the very small number of persons to whom it is available, the unique subject matter of the decisions against which it may be used and the exceptional circumstances in which it may be exercised".<br />The rule is that by Article 263 TFUE the CJEU has no jurisdiction to annul either the national laws or administrative measures of a Member State as stated in para.69 of the cited judgment. The only exception to that rule is to be restrictively interpreted( odiosa sunt restringenda).<br />Tomás de las Heras Lorenzonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-13296562375910594072019-03-12T09:36:28.198+00:002019-03-12T09:36:28.198+00:00@Thinking aloud - re Art 53(b) / Rule 28(2) EPC an...@Thinking aloud - re Art 53(b) / Rule 28(2) EPC and the actions of the Administrative Council, you might be interested in this piece from the CIPA Life Sciences committee - "Observations of CIPA on CA/56/17 (proposed amendments to Rules 27 and 28 EPC)" [<a href="http://www.cipa.org.uk/policy-and-news/latest-news/observations-of-cipa-on-proposals-to-exclude-organisms-produced-by-biological-processes-from-patentability/" rel="nofollow">link</a>] - see sections 2.4 and 2.5 in particular.Jim Robertsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-61552396654312357672019-03-11T21:34:58.561+00:002019-03-11T21:34:58.561+00:00Please excuse my miss spelling!Please excuse my miss spelling!Banana in PJ'snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-24394460258763981182019-03-11T21:31:46.876+00:002019-03-11T21:31:46.876+00:00If the suggestion of its application to Infosoc ho...If the suggestion of its application to Infosoc holds, there can be no limits, so the EU's prohibition on plant patents could be enforced. Thinking cap wearers could identify a miriad of examples. I wouldn't worry about the UK's participation in the UPC, because the UK invoking its intention to leave is bound to be a breach of an EU law. "Ever closer union" may trump article 50?<br />Banana in PJ'snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-29447958901205529082019-03-11T16:03:11.125+00:002019-03-11T16:03:11.125+00:00As this decision of the CJEU is meant to be applic...As this decision of the CJEU is meant to be applicable in IP at large, i.e. not only in matters of copyright or the InfoSoc, would it apply to the interpretation of Art 53, b) given by the BA in T 1063/18? Can the CJEU decide for a supra national organisation comprising as well non-EU member states?<br /><br />Another consequence to be drawn then is that the post-Brexit stay of UK in the UPC is clearly out.Thinking aloudnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-54964154287109782892019-03-11T12:55:45.960+00:002019-03-11T12:55:45.960+00:00At first glance this looks like a major decision w...At first glance this looks like a major decision with unpredictable, far-reaching ramifications that will excite the constitutional lawyers and keep them busy. It would also fuel the Brexit-supporting arguments and anti-EU sentiment across Europe.<br /><br />However, I am at a loss as to how this is such a concern. Where is the mention of the incorrect implementation of Directives? It appears to be a decision directly applying the Treaty to a national action. Along with "annulling an act rendered by an authority of a Member State", the article reads as though an Act of the Latvian Parliament has been annulled, which it hasn't. Is this an attempt to misrepresent the decision and/or stretch its application to areas of particular interest, such as the annulment of national copyright laws?<br /><br />As regards the decision itself, it is said that national criminal law is not being impeded. Possibly not, but is the upshot that a powerful member of a central bank cannot be suspended when charged with serious criminal activity?<br /><br />As an aside, this law makes clear the independence of the functioning of the central banks. How then, did the European Central Bank satisfy the desires of EU leaders after pressure from President Obama on Angela Merkel to deal with the Greece financial crisis? I am only interested and have no detailed knowledge of events.Banana in PJsnoreply@blogger.com