View
214
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Panelist:
Mr. Michael GrossFraunhofer-GesellschaftMunich, Germany
5.2 Dispute ResolutionDispute ResolutionNeeds and Needs and ExperienceExperience
1
Fraunhofer GesellschaftFraunhofer Gesellschaft
-
-
-
-
German non profit R&D organisation
applied research/worldwide
58 Institutes
staff: 12,500
2
-
-
-
-
turnover 2004: 1,000,000,000 € (> 900,000,000 €
contract research)
2500 R&D-Agreements/year
240 License Agreements/year
most popular Licensing Product: MP3
3
• R&D - Dispute Resolution by an
Arbitrator/Mediator/ Conciliator or
negotiations by the R&D-partners?• Two
Cases - Case 1:
- Case 2:
Arbitration betweentwo European R&D-partnersMediation between aGerman inventor and anUS License partner 4
Case 1: Arbitration Case 1: Arbitration betweenbetween 2 European 2 European
R&D-partners R&D-partners "Acoustic Construction of a Concert Hall"I. THE PARTIES
German Research Institute -Ministry of a European Country (contractor)
5
II. THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT
R&D Agreement of January 1995 Art. 11 = Standard ICC Arbitration
Clause
6
R&D Agreement was established in > 2 versions:
Art. 12:
English and anotherEuropean language(contractor's language)
in case of disputes the text of the version of the other European language shall prevail
7
The parties did not agree on- the place of Arbitration was fixed by the Court: Paris
- the language of the arbitration
the Arbitrator ordered: English(written submissions in Englishaccompanied by a version in thelanguage of the contractor) 8
- the applicable law the Arbitrator ordered:
UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts shall be applicable
9
III. THE RELIEF REQUESTED
Claimant:
€ 191000 + interest at the rate of 5 % above the German base rate+ costs of Arbitration
10
Respondent:
"Although Art. 11 of the R&D Agreement provides for arbitration as a means of resolving all disputes arising out of the ontract, we also object to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration, as such a general provision regarding arbitration cannot be valid."
11
IV. THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- Request for arbitration: 20 Dec. 2002
- Sole arbitrator
- No request for an oral hearing by the parties
12
V. AWARD
6 October 2004:
€ 191000+ interest+ legal fees and expenses (of Claimant)+ costs of arbitration (US $ 22000)
13
VI. PROBLEMS
1. ~ 2 years
2. Enforcement of the award in the country of the contractor pending!
14
Case 2: Mediation Case 2: Mediation betweenbetween
a German a German inventor inventor
and an US and an US LicenseeLicensee "Monorail or rapid exchange
catheter" (angioplasty procedures)I. THE PARTIES
German Inventor - US Global Player (Licensor) (Lisensee)
15
II. THE AGREEMENT
Patent License Agreement of June 1986 (3 Amendments) Art. XVI: Applicable Law =
German law NO DISPUTE RESOLUTION CLAUSE
16
Licensee of 1986 sold its facilities to a competitor for $ 2,16 billion: 1998
New Licensee enforced the licensed patent several times in the US, e.g. by award against a competitor: July 2001
17
III. THE RELIEF REQUESTED
Under payment of royalties: $ 16 million
18
IV. THE MEDIATION
- Request for mediation: 24 July 2001
- Mediation: 16 August 2001in Minneapolis, USAStart: 10:00 a.m. (16
August)Settlement: 1:00 a.m. (17 August)Result: ??? 19
Licensee purchased the licensed patent:
US $ 80 million
20
V. PROBLEMS
NO PROBLEMS!
applause for the inventor!!!
21
• R&D - Dispute Resolution by an Arbitrator/Mediator/ Conciliator or
negotiations by the R&D-partners?
22
It depends!
23
Wild applause for the panelist!!
24
Recommended