Court Decisions Related to IP Rights


PATENT ★★IP High Court Grand Panel Case No. 2018 (Ne) 10063; June 7, 2019 (Presiding Judge TAKABE)

“Carbon Dioxide-Containing Viscous Composition”

Case: A case in which the Court determined the calculation of damages under Article 102, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Patent Act and the elements to be considered therefor.

PATENT IP High Court Case No. 2017 (Gyo-ke) 10117; November 6, 2018 (Presiding Judge TSURUOKA)

“Immunochromatography test device and kit for mycoplasma pneumoniae detection”

Case: A case in which the Court denied the eligibility for a cited reference on the grounds that the cited reference does not contain the description of a cited invention in such a manner as to enable a person skilled in the art to manufacture it, and thus the cited invention does not correspond to “inventions that were described in a publication” (Paragraph 29-1, Item (3) of the Patent Act. The Court found that the patented invention has an inventive step.

PATENT ★★Osaka District Court Case No. 2016 (Wa) 6494; December 18, 2018 (Presiding Judge TANI)

“Roll Paper for Medicine Packaging”

Case: A case in which the court found, regarding the wording of “(a product) used in XXX” in the claims, that whether or not the product is actually used in XXX does not influence the decision on whether or not the product belongs to the technical scope of a patented invention (the court affirmed [indirect] infringement of a patent for an invention of a sub-combination).


The Intellectual Property High Court Decision of March 19, 2020 (Case No. 2019 (Gyo-Ke) 10152 — Presiding Judge TSURUOKA)

Trademark Act A case in which the Court revoked a decision of the Japan Patent Office which refused an application for registration of the mark “ベジバリア/塩・糖・脂” (BEJIBARIA/SaltSugarFat) on the grounds that the mark is similar to the registered trademark “塩糖脂” (Salt, Sugar, Fat).


Overview of Revised Design Act 2019 (Effective April 1, 2020)


Copyright Act The Intellectual Property High Court Decision of December 26, 2019 (Case No. 2018 (Ne) 10048 — Presiding Judge Otaka)

A case in which the Court found that, with respect to a photographic work whose subject is a pair of penguins, each one of the penguin pictures in the work can be considered to be independently copyrightable, and affirmed that acts of reproducing and transmitting publicly the respective pictures of the two penguins separately constitute infringements of copyrights of the respective penguin pictures.

Other IP

Legislative Bill for Partial Revision of the Plant Variety Protection and Seed Act

[Note: This is a legislative bill and is not promulgated. We will provide further information after promulgation of the act.]

Unfair Competition Prevention Act ★★The Intellectual Property High Court Decision of January 29, 2020 (Case No. 2018 (Ne) 10081 — Presiding Judge MORI)

A case in which the Court affirmed the typical and substantial increase of an amount of a reasonable royalty as a premium to damages to be paid for misappropriation of a famous indication, and awarded a high royalty rate.

Related Newsletters