关于知识产权 知识产权培训 树立尊重知识产权的风尚 知识产权外联 部门知识产权 知识产权和热点议题 特定领域知识产权 专利和技术信息 商标信息 工业品外观设计信息 地理标志信息 植物品种信息(UPOV) 知识产权法律、条约和判决 知识产权资源 知识产权报告 专利保护 商标保护 工业品外观设计保护 地理标志保护 植物品种保护(UPOV) 知识产权争议解决 知识产权局业务解决方案 知识产权服务缴费 谈判与决策 发展合作 创新支持 公私伙伴关系 人工智能工具和服务 组织简介 与产权组织合作 问责制 专利 商标 工业品外观设计 地理标志 版权 商业秘密 WIPO学院 讲习班和研讨会 知识产权执法 WIPO ALERT 宣传 世界知识产权日 WIPO杂志 案例研究和成功故事 知识产权新闻 产权组织奖 企业 高校 土著人民 司法机构 遗传资源、传统知识和传统文化表现形式 经济学 金融 无形资产 性别平等 全球卫生 气候变化 竞争政策 可持续发展目标 前沿技术 移动应用 体育 旅游 PATENTSCOPE 专利分析 国际专利分类 ARDI - 研究促进创新 ASPI - 专业化专利信息 全球品牌数据库 马德里监视器 Article 6ter Express数据库 尼斯分类 维也纳分类 全球外观设计数据库 国际外观设计公报 Hague Express数据库 洛迦诺分类 Lisbon Express数据库 全球品牌数据库地理标志信息 PLUTO植物品种数据库 GENIE数据库 产权组织管理的条约 WIPO Lex - 知识产权法律、条约和判决 产权组织标准 知识产权统计 WIPO Pearl(术语) 产权组织出版物 国家知识产权概况 产权组织知识中心 产权组织技术趋势 全球创新指数 世界知识产权报告 PCT - 国际专利体系 ePCT 布达佩斯 - 国际微生物保藏体系 马德里 - 国际商标体系 eMadrid 第六条之三(徽章、旗帜、国徽) 海牙 - 国际外观设计体系 eHague 里斯本 - 国际地理标志体系 eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange 调解 仲裁 专家裁决 域名争议 检索和审查集中式接入(CASE) 数字查询服务(DAS) WIPO Pay 产权组织往来账户 产权组织各大会 常设委员会 会议日历 WIPO Webcast 产权组织正式文件 发展议程 技术援助 知识产权培训机构 COVID-19支持 国家知识产权战略 政策和立法咨询 合作枢纽 技术与创新支持中心(TISC) 技术转移 发明人援助计划(IAP) WIPO GREEN 产权组织的PAT-INFORMED 无障碍图书联合会 产权组织服务创作者 WIPO Translate 语音转文字 分类助手 成员国 观察员 总干事 部门活动 驻外办事处 职位空缺 采购 成果和预算 财务报告 监督
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
法律 条约 判决 按管辖区浏览

WIPO Lex

WIPOLEX026-j

返回

High Court of Delhi, India [2023]: Communication Components Antenna Inc. v Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik GmbH, 2023:DHC:4582

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 Patents Act, 1970

The High Court of Delhi Rules Governing Patent Suits, 2022