This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of
facilitating exchange during the 2023 WIPO IP
Judges Forum.
Session 6: Rules of Evidence in Intellectual Property Litigation
High
Court of Delhi, India [2023]: Communication Components Antenna Inc. v
Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik GmbH, 2023:DHC:4582
Date of judgment: September 20, 2023
Issuing authority: High Court of Delhi
Level of the issuing authority: First Instance
Type of procedure: Judicial (Civin( �/span>
Subject matter: Patents (Inventions); Enforcement of IP and Related
Laws
Plaintiff: Communication Components Antenna Inc.
Defendant: Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik Gmbh
Keywords: Summary Adjudication, Live Transcription, Patent
infringement, High Court of Delhi Rules Governing Patent Suits
Basic facts: The present suit is a patent infringement action in
respect of patent no. IN240893, titled ‘Asymmetrical Beams for Spectrum
Efficiency’ and granted in favor of the Plaintiff. The patent is stated
to be relating to a method and apparatus enabling the increase in subscriber
capacity and enhancing performance of a base station.
The Defendants filed a counterclaim seeking revocation of the
Plaintiff’s patent under Section 104 of the Patents Act, 1970. The patent
itself is valid until March 17, 2017. In terms of the High Court of Delhi
Rules Governing Patent Suits, 2022 (hereinafter ‘Patent Rules’), if a patent
has less than a five-year term left, the Court can resort to summary
adjudication so as to expedite the matter. Therefore, the Court sought to
resort to summary adjudication in the present case.
Issues were framed, and it was decided that the evidence of the experts
of both parties would be recorded before the Court.
Held: With the consent of the parties, the suit proceeded
for summary adjudication. The High Court of Delhi held that the evidence
of the experts would be recorded before the Court only. This was the
first instance where evidence before the Court would be recorded using
live-transcription technology.
Relevant holdings in relation to rules of evidence in intellectual
property litigation: The High Court of Delhi determined that it would
initially record evidence of both parties’ experts and, thereafter, of the
witnesses on non-technical aspects, including damages. The parties
are permitted to file the evidence of one person on non-technical aspects.
The evidence shall be recorded before the Court and live transcription
of the same permitted. The related costs shall be borne by both parties
equally. The transcription agency shall, however, be engaged by the
Plaintiff. One to two personnel from the transcription agency are
permitted to be present in court to enable live transcription. The cost
estimates for transcription shall be exchanged between the parties.
Cross-examination of each technical witness is restricted to 90 minutes.
Cross-examination of non-technical witnesses is restricted to 60 minutes
(one hour).
Both parties shall review their respective expert affidavits and file
the final affidavits of their experts regarding infringement and invalidity
within a period of four weeks. The same shall be exchanged by the
parties.
After the record is organized (e.g., by marking of exhibits in terms of
the affidavit in evidence), the electronic record shall be made available to
counsel for both parties to enable smooth recording of the evidence by the
Court. Parties are permitted to prepare trial bundles in consultation
with each other for the convenience of the Court.
Relevant
legislation:
The High Court of Delhi Rules Governing
Patent Suits, 2022