About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Japan

JP023-j

Back

2006(Ju)1772, Minshu Vol. 62, No. 5

Date of Judgment: April 24, 2008

 

Issuing Authority: Supreme Court

 

Level of the Issuing Authority: Final Instance

 

Type of Procedure: JudicialCivil

 

Subject Matter: Patent (Inventions)

 

Summary of the judgment (decision):

 

Where, with regard to X's claim against Y for damages for infringement of a patent right, the court of second instance rendered a judgment to dismiss the claim by adopting Y's allegation of invalidity under Article 104-3, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act, and then a trial decision to allow a correction for the purpose of restricting the scope of claims pertaining to said patent right became final and binding, if X challenges the determination of the court of second instance by arguing that there exist the grounds for retrial set forth in Article 338, paragraph (1), item (viii) of the Code of Civil Procedure because said trial decision became final and binding, given the facts shown in (1) and (2) below, such behavior of X is regarded as causing an unreasonable delay in solving the dispute and therefore impermissible in light of the purpose of the provision of Article 104-3 of the Patent Act:

(1) Considering that the judgment of first instance dismissed X's claim for damages by adopting Y's allegation of invalidity, X should have advanced, at an early stage at least in the proceedings in the second instance, an allegation to deny or overturn Y's allegation of invalidity;
(2) The trial decision in question was made in response to the request for a trial for correction filed by X after the conclusion of oral argument in the second instance. In view of the content of the trial decision and the fact that X filed requests for trial for correction twice and withdrew both requests while the proceedings in the second instance continued for more than one year, no reason can be found to justify X's failure to advance, prior to the conclusion of oral argument in the second instance, a counter-allegation relating to the request for a trial for correction that was filed after the conclusion of oral argument, in order to deny or overturn Y's allegation of invalidity.

(There is an opinion.)