Talk:Cross-border injunction

Community Designs/TMs
Would be good to put in a bit about how EU Community Design and TM courts can do cross border injunctions. 81.171.141.27 (talk) 14:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). --Edcolins (talk) 17:05, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Information.svg Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.

scope?
Something doesn't feel right about this article (sorry to state it so vaguely, but I can't exactly express it). The article focusses very much on patent cases, deemed to fall within the exclusive jurisdiction clauses; and furthermore on the ECJ work on articles 6.1 and 14. But shouldn't a cross border injeunction article start with where this IS undoubtedly possible? For example to require performance of a contract (with obligations in multiple countries) where prorogation has taken place or where the single defendant was sued in his own domicile?

Then under case law we could discuss the
 * IP matters (EPs are national rights, even if they are the same EP)
 * "connected cases should be interpreted restrictively (different defendatnts for different national versions of the same EP)
 * anti-suit injunctions (UK)

I feel however not enough of an expert, and am not aware of relevant literature that could back this approach up; which leaves us stuck with a newsy (well: CJEU-sy) piece... Any thoughts (or a rename to focus on IP?)? L.tak (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * An example of a cross-border (preliminary) injunction was given just yesterday by the Dutch judge in which the judge: "gebiedt I-Optics zich binnen de Europese Unie te onthouden van reclame I, II, IIIa en IIIb met bepaling dat dit gebod ingaat één week na betekening van dit vonnis;" (orders I-Optics to refrain from using commercial I, II, IIIa and IIIb witihin the European Union from 1 week after service of process of the verdict), after assuming jurisdiction based on 4(1) [former 2] of Brussels I 1215/2012. Thinking more about this, I think we should

L.tak (talk) 11:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ask an expert to work this out,
 * or: move this page to: Cross border injunctions in European patent cases