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 Finance Intangible Assets 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

Germany

DE023-j

Back

2024 WIPO IP Judges Forum Informal Case Summary – Federal Court of Justice, Germany [2023]: Case No. X ZR 123/20 – CQI-Bericht II

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2024 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 2: Standard Essential Patents

 

Federal Court of Justice, Germany [2023]: Case No. X ZR 123/20 – CQI-Bericht II

 

Date of judgment: January 24, 2023

Issuing authority: German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof)

Level of the issuing authority: Final Instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Civin( �/span>

Subject matter: Patents (Inventions)

Plaintiff: G.

Defendant: H.

Keywords: Exhaustion in the supply chain, Covenant to be sued last, Consent for chip manufacturer, Implementation in larger device

 

Basic facts: Plaintiff owns a patent concerning a method for requesting and transmitting a channel quality information report (CQI report) to the base station in a mobile radio system.  Defendant sells mobile phones in which, according to the findings of the lower courts, the patented method is implemented.  The defendant claims that the plaintiff has agreed a covenant to be sued last with the manufacturer of the chipsets that are installed in the mobile telephones manufactured by it, according to which a patent infringement may only be asserted against these chipset manufacturers if all third parties in question have previously been sued.  The defendant invokes this as exhaustion of the rights from the plaintiff’s patent, which also includes the use of the patented teaching for the mobile phones manufactured by the defendant.

 

The Court of Appeal, as the lower court, found a patent infringement on the basis that the defendant makes use of the teaching of the patent in its mobile phones and the patent rights are not exhausted.  The asserted contracts only contained a covenant to be sued last.  According to the Court of Appeal, since a mere covenant not to sue does not constitute consent to the distribution of patented products, this prerequisite for exhaustion is even less fulfilled by the asserted covenant to be sued last.

 

In its appeal before the Federal Court of Justice, the defendant argues, inter alia, that a covenant to be sued last fulfills the prerequisites for exhaustion.  This also applies to the mobile phones manufactured by the defendant.

 

Held: The Federal Court of Justice reversed the decision of the Higher Regional Court and referred the case back to this court for a new hearing, finding that a covenant to be sued last could suffice for an exhaustion.

 

Relevant holdings in relation to standard essential patents: In relation to the consequences of a covenant not to sue and a covenant to be sued last, a covenant not to sue generally leads to the exhaustion of rights with regard to products put on the market on this basis.

 

As to the question of whether a covenant to be sued last leads to exhaustion, it is of particular importance whether the contracting party, in the normally expected course of events, is at risk of being held liable by the patent proprietor for infringement of the patent.

 

In relation to the question of whether an exhaustion by consenting to the manufacture of a chipset covers also the manufacture of a mobile phone, consent to the placing on the market of a product may be deemed to be consent to the placing on the market of a larger device incorporating it if this is the only commercially reasonable use.

 

Consent to the placing of a product on the market may lead to the exhaustion of rights in respect of a larger device equipped therewith if all the properties and functions defined in the patent are realized by the product covered by the consent, and if the other components of the larger device are of no importance in this respect.

 

Relevant legislation: None.  The law of exhaustion in patent law is not part of the statutory patent law in Germany; the law is developed by the courts, similar to other jurisdictions.