Examen de la législation d'application de l'Accord sur les ADPIC ‒ Recherche

Réinitialiser
 
 

Aux termes de l'article 63:2 de l'Accord sur les ADPIC, les Membres doivent notifier les lois et réglementations qu'ils auront rendues exécutoires, et qui visent les questions faisant l'objet de l'Accord, au Conseil des ADPIC pour l'aider dans son examen du fonctionnement de l'Accord.

Cette page vous permet d'effectuer une recherche dans les questions et réponses des Membres au sujet des lois et réglementations notifiées. Vous pouvez consulter les résultats de la recherche à l'écran ou les télécharger afin de les imprimer au format Excel. Vous pouvez également télécharger des documents spécifiques.

* Vous n'êtes PAS obligé(e) de sélectionner tous les champs de recherche ci-dessous (uniquement les champs qui sont pertinents pour votre recherche).
* Veuillez noter que les critères de recherche sélectionnés sont cumulatifs et figureront tous dans les résultats de votre recherche.


Page 15 de 677   |   Nombre de documents : 13533

Cote du document Membre notifiant Membre soulevant la question Question Réponse Date de distribution du document  
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 28. Articles 50.2 and 50.8 require that judicial authorities and administrative bodies be authorized to grant provisional remedies when a delay is likely to cause "irreparable harm" to the right holder. Please describe briefly what is required by the authorities identified in answers to questions 25, 26 and 27 to establish "irreparable harm" to the right holder.
The legal regulation of provisional measures is considerably liberal and that is why the applicant is not obliged to substantiate the threat of irreparable harm. It is enough for the applicant to affirm with sufficient credibility, with respect to circumstances, that temporary regulation of the terms between the parties is necessary, or that enforcement of a later decision on the merits would be difficult or wholly impossible. The judge is able to employ a considerable range of judicial discretion in such a case and is not bound by the narrow limits of enforcement of provisional measures.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 29. Articles 50.2 and 50.8 also require that judicial authorities and administrative bodies be authorized to grant provisional remedies when there is a "demonstrable risk of evidence being destroyed". Please describe briefly what factors are considered by the competent authorities in determining when there is a "demonstrable risk of evidence being destroyed".
In cases of provisional preservation of evidence (see answer to question 26) the regulation is liberal as well. It is not necessary to provide a demonstrable risk of evidence being destroyed, it is sufficient to demonstrate the cause of fear, that evidence could not be provided later at all, or could only be provided with great difficulty. The judge is able to employ a considerable range of judicial discretion in this case as well. It would be counter productive to describe the criteria for the decision concerning the preservation of evidence, since the decision in question is in each and every particular case unique from the point of view of the merits.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 30. Articles 50.3 and 50.8 require that judicial and administrative authorities be authorized to require an applicant to provide evidence to establish with a sufficient degree of certainty that the applicant is the right holder and that infringement has occurred or is imminent. With respect to each intellectual property right defined in Article 1.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, please describe the evidence required by right holders to establish ownership.
In the case of industrial property the evidence is relatively simple, because the owner can provide the deed issued by the Slovak Industrial Property Office confirming that he or she is the right holder. In the case of copyright and related rights the situation is a little more complicated, since in a situation where copyright is questionable, the decision has to be made by the court after a request to establish authorship is submitted.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 31. Articles 50.3 and 50.8 require that judicial and administrative authorities be authorized to provide a security or equivalent assurance to protect the defendant. With respect to each intellectual property right identified in Article 1.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, please cite the legal authority establishing a security or equivalent assurance.
The question of the manner of substantiating a right has already been answered. The specialised legal regulation so far does not allow the court or another authority to order the applicant to provide sufficient security in accordance with Article 50.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 32. Article 50.4 requires that parties be notified when provisional measures have been adopted inaudita altera parte. Please describe briefly the procedures followed by each authority able to adopt such measures for notifying affected parties and state the time within which such notice must take place.
Provisional measures are enforceable since the day of their delivery in written form to the parties. i.e., they can be enforced no sooner than they are delivered to the obliged person. The court usually sends the opposing party a motion to adopt provisional measures, including a request to make a statement concerning the motion, within a set time period. This means that the party, and primarily the obliged person, is notified when the motion to adopt provisional measures is filed, even before their enforcement is initiated.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 33. Article 50.4 also requires that defendants be afforded a review process to determine whether provisional measures should be modified, confirmed, or revoked. Please describe briefly the procedures a defendant must follow to initiate review proceedings in each of the authorities able to adopt such measures and identify the period within which such proceedings must be initiated.
A party is able to appeal against the decision to adopt provisional measures within 15 days since the delivery of the decision in written form. The appellate court after hearing the parties and their statements is authorised to confirm, modify or revoke the motion. The proceedings in this case are very simple as well, since it is sufficient to propose or directly present the evidence which puts in doubt the reasonableness of the motion, or directly disproves it. Nevertheless, the decision about powers and duties will be made pending due process of law, since the effectiveness of provisional measures is strictly bound by the duty to file a due action in rem.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 34. Article 50.5 requires that competent authorities be authorized to require applicants to supply other information necessary for the identification of goods concerned by the authority that will execute the provisional measures. Please describe briefly what other information may be required by the authorities and cite the legal authority establishing the basis for this supplemental information.
There is no need for specific legal regulation, in accordance with Article 50.5 of the TRIPS Agreement, since the applicant's duty is to submit all necessary or required evidence.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 35. Articles 50.6 and 50.8 provide that if proceedings leading to a decision on the merits are not initiated within a reasonable time, provisional remedies granted by competent authorities shall be revoked or otherwise cease to have effect, at the request of the defendant. Please identify the relevant provisions in the law of the Slovak Republic authorizing the revocation or cessation of provisional measures if review proceedings are not initiated within a reasonable time and specify what constitutes a "reasonable time period" to initiate proceedings.
Pursuant to Section 76, paragraph 3 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, the court sets a time-limit on the effectiveness of provisional measures, or binds their effectiveness by filing a proper action in rem within an assigned time period, usually of one month, stating that the effectiveness of provisional measures ceases to exist if the action is not filed within the period assigned, or by a valid decision in rem. The period assigned to filing an action depends on the nature of the court and is usually related also to the range and complexity of the issue.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 36. Articles 50.7 and 50.8 provide that judicial and administrative authorities shall have the authority to order the applicant to provide the defendant appropriate compensation for any injury caused by the adoption of provisional measures when said measures are revoked, have lapsed, or when it has been determined that there has been no infringement or threat of infringement. Please describe how the competent authorities determine "appropriate compensation".
The legal regulation does not include the notion of appropriate compensation. Compensation for injury can be established only by means of claim for damage. This, however, is possible only in case the applicant acted unlawfully or contra bonos mores, or in case he or she was engaged in unfair competition involving discrediting, in accordance with the wording of Section 50 of the Commercial Code. By discrediting is to be understood any action through which a competitor provides or spreads false information about the situation, products and achievements of another competitor, if the information is able to cause any injury to another competitor. In case the action of the applicant could not be found unlawful or contra bonos mores, the enforcement of compensation would be difficult, since no damage in the legal sense occurred. In this particular case the law of the Slovak Republic does not correspond sufficiently with the TRIPS Agreement.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 37. Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that countries adopt procedures that enable right holders to request suspension of the importation of counterfeit trademark goods and pirated copyright works. Please identify the competent authority in the Slovak Republic authorized to accept applications for a request to suspend release of suspected infringing goods and cite the relevant law or regulation governing such authority.
The rights of the right holder, in accordance with the wording of Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement, are currently not addressed by the law in the Slovak Republic, however a specific new regulation addressing this issue is under consideration.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 38. Please describe the procedures a right holder must follow to obtain border protection by the competent authorities, e.g., if there is a formal application that must be submitted to the competent authority, judicial or administrative, and the information required in the request for suspension and cite the law or regulations providing such procedures.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 39. Please explain whether procedures, permissible under Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement, are available to stop the export of goods suspected of infringing copyright and/or trademarks.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 40. Article 52 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that right holders wishing to stop importation of counterfeit trademark goods or pirated copyright works present evidence to the competent authorities that there is prima facie infringement of their trademark or copyright. Please explain what evidence will constitute prima facie infringement in the Slovak Republic.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 41. Article 52 also requires that the right holder provide a "sufficiently detailed description of the goods" to be stopped. Please explain what is required of the right holder in the Slovak Republic for a description to be "sufficiently detailed".
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 42. Article 52 requires that the competent authorities notify the right holder that his application is accepted within a reasonable time. Please explain within what period of time the competent authority responds to a request for suspension of release of goods and, if the application is accepted, the length of time during which enforcement action will be taken.
Although the right holder is not able to enter a proper cause for trial, pursuant to Section 60 of the Act on Customs No. 180/1996 by course of government regulation no. 150/1958, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations, his or her suggestion of the procedure has to be accepted as a grievance. Pursuant to Section 6, paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the regulation, the grievance will be decided on by the competent authority within ten days. If it is not possible, the acceptance of the grievance has to be confirmed within five days. In exceptional cases only a superior authority is able to prolong this time period up to ten days. Pursuant to Section 11 of the regulation, the applicant has to be notified within the above-mentioned time periods, even in case his or her application was unjustified.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 43. Article 53.1 requires that the competent authorities have the authority to secure from an applicant a security or equivalent assurance sufficient to protect a defendant and to prevent abuse. Please verify that the competent authorities identified above are empowered to require security or equivalent assurance and provide citations to the provisions of law or regulation that grant them that authority.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 44. Article 53.2 provides that the owner, importer, or consignee of goods involving industrial designs, patents, layout designs or undisclosed information that have been suspended by customs authorities should be able, in certain circumstances, to have such goods released on payment of security sufficient to protect the right holder from infringement. Please identify what forms of intellectual property, if any, are subject to provisions of Article 53.2 and cite to the relevant provisions of law or regulations.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 45. Article 54 requires that the importer and the applicant be notified promptly of the suspension or release of goods. Please specify the period within which the competent authority is to issue a notice that the release of goods has been suspended.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 46. Article 55 makes it clear that the right holder applying for suspension of infringing goods must initiate a proceeding on the merits in an appropriate forum within a reasonable period of time or the goods will be released. Please identify the fora in which an applicant/party may initiate proceedings on the merits that will allow customs authorities to hold the goods beyond ten working days.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 47. Article 55 provides that a review is to take place within a reasonable time at the request of the defending party to determine if the suspension measures should be modified, revoked or confirmed pending the outcome of the proceeding on the merits. Please identify the forum that is authorized to conduct such a review and describe the procedure and cite the applicable law or regulations.
See reply to question 37 above.
05/05/1999

Page 15 de 677   |   Nombre de documents : 13533

 
Réinitialiser