Otherwise, criminal action can be brought via direct summons. In this case, it is up to the plaintiff to gather evidence of the alleged facts. 3. Specific Procedural Rules Dealing With Trademark Litigation a. Appeal Against the Decisions Rendered by the Director of the French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). Pursuant to article L. 411-4 of the CPI, decisions of the Director of the INPI granting, refusing or maintaining industrial property titles shall be submitted to the civil Courts of Appeal. The ten Courts of Appeal having exclusive jurisdiction on such matters are listed in article R. 411-19 CPI. The Court can only cancel or refuse to cancel the Director's decision. Appeals shall be exercised within one month of the decision (the plaintiff shall file a written statement duplicate - with the court –in Clerk's office). b. Courts Jurisdiction With Respect To Trademark Litigation National trademarks:The First Level Courts (tribunaux de grande instance) have subject matter jurisdiction for trademark civil litigation. According to this rule, trademark infringement actions involving two merchants are excluded from the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court (tribunal de commerce). European trademarks: Trial proceedings relating to European trademarks shall be heard by the Paris First Level Court (tribunal de grande instance de Paris). c. Specific Summary Proceeding (Art. L716-6 CPI) The President of the court before which proceedings have been instituted, sitting in chambers, may provisionally prohibit a continuation of the alleged infringing acts, subject to a daily fine, or may subject such continuation to the provision of securities for the purpose of ensuring compensation to the owner of the trademark or to the beneficiary of an exclusive right of exploitation. Action for prohibition or provision of securities shall be admissible only if the case appears well-founded and proceedings were instituted within a short time following the day on which the owner of the trademark or the beneficiary of an exclusive right of exploitation obtained knowledge of the facts on which they are grounded. Such procedure is likely to be altered because of the forthcoming transposition of the EU Directive 2004/48/EC into French law. According to the French draft, preliminary injunctions may be requested before filing a complaint on the merits and may be requested unilaterally. Reasonable available evidence creating sufficient degree of certainty of a breach of the intellectual property right would suffice to bring this action. d. Trademark Infringement Seizure Operations
Otherwise, criminal action can be brought via direct summons. In this case, it is up to the plaintiff to gather evidence of the alleged facts. 3. Specific Procedural Rules Dealing With Trademark Litigation a. Appeal Against the Decisions Rendered by the Director of the French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). Pursuant to article L. 411-4 of the CPI, decisions of the Director of the INPI granting, refusing or maintaining industrial property titles shall be submitted to the civil Courts of Appeal. The ten Courts of Appeal having exclusive jurisdiction on such matters are listed in article R. 411-19 CPI. The Court can only cancel or refuse to cancel the Director's decision. Appeals shall be exercised within one month of the decision (the plaintiff shall file a written statement –in duplicate - with the court Clerk's office). b. Courts Jurisdiction With Respect To Trademark Litigation National trademarks:The First Level Courts (tribunaux de grande instance) have subject matter jurisdiction for trademark civil litigation. According to this rule, trademark infringement actions involving two merchants are excluded from the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court (tribunal de commerce). European trademarks: proceedings relating to European trademarks shall be heard by the Paris First Level Court (tribunal de grande instance de Paris). c. Specific Summary Proceeding (Art. L716-6 CPI) The President of the court before which proceedings have been instituted, sitting in chambers, may provisionally prohibit a continuation of the alleged infringing acts, subject to a daily fine, or may subject such continuation to the provision of securities for the purpose of ensuring compensation to the owner of the trademark or to the beneficiary of an exclusive right of exploitation. Action for prohibition or provision of securities shall be admissible only if the case appears well-founded and proceedings were instituted within a short time following the day on which the owner of the trademark or the beneficiary of an exclusive right of exploitation obtained knowledge of the facts on which they are grounded. Such procedure is likely to be altered because of the forthcoming transposition of the EU Directive 2004/48/EC into French law. According to the French draft, preliminary injunctions may be requested before filing a complaint on the merits and may be requested unilaterally. Reasonable available evidence creating sufficient degree of certainty of a breach of the intellectual property right would suffice to bring this action. d. Trademark Infringement Seizure Operations Trial
INTAModelCaseManagementProceduresReport.docx