13 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Evaluation of the Reforms of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court 2010-2013
Over the course of this report, we analyse both quantitatively and qualitatively the impact of the 2010 2013 reforms undertaken at the former Patents County Court (PCC), now the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC). The reforms introduced a number of changes staggered over the period 2010 2013, including a cap on recoverable costs and damages, a reduction of the length as well as complexity of court actions, and a reconstitution of the PCC as the IPEC. In our quantitative case counts we find that there has been a large increase in the quantity of cases filed at the IPEC, post-reforms, while through a comparative study of the High Court (HC) and Patents Court (PHC) we show that with the exception of patent cases, there has not been a corresponding increase in cases at the higher level. We find quantitative and qualitative evidence that the costs cap and active case management by the IPEC judge have been the most influential reforms with respect to the large increase in cases filed at the IPEC post-reforms. We also note that case filings by SMEs have increased substantially following the reforms, fulfilling one of the key aims of the reforms. Importantly, we find that this effect is driven by changes at the extensive (more claimants) and intensive (more cases per claimant) margins of litigation behaviour at the IPEC. Finally, we provide a theoretical model that allows us to gauge the effect of the reforms on those IP disputes that never reach a court. Our theoretical predictions suggest that in addition to encouraging more IPEC case filings, the reforms have had the effect of increasing the quantity of out-of-court settlements as well
Recommended from our members
Who Needs a Copyright Small Claims Court? Evidence from the U.K.'s IP Enterprise Court
Recommended from our members
Examining Patent Cases at the Patents Court and Intellectual Property Enterprise Court 2007-2013
Recommended from our members
The Effect of Fee Shifting on Litigation: Evidence from a Court Reform in the UK
We study a U.K. court reform that established a cap on the amount of costs that a successful litigant may recover in a case litigated in the Patents County Court (PCC, now the IP Enterprise Court). We first build a theoretical model showing that the introduction of a costs cap is equivalent to an intermediate cost allocation rule falling between the English and American Rules. Our model suggests that the impact of the introduction of such a fee-shifting rule on the number of claims filed and the settlement rate is ambiguous. It shows, however, that the effect of the costs cap on IP holders' incentives to file a claim is stronger for smaller IP holders. Our empirical analysis of the impact of the costs cap takes advantage of our ability to compare IP litigation in the PCC with IP litigation in the High Court of England and Wales, which was not directly affected by the reform. Contrary to the existing literature, we find that the costs cap increased the number of cases filed by smaller companies and decreased the rate of settlement
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Analyzing Court Selection in Patent Litigation
This paper examines court selection by plaintiffs in patent litigation. We build a forum shopping model that provides a set of predictions regarding plaintiffs’ court preferences, and the way these preferences depend on the market proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant. Then, using a rich dataset of patent litigation at German regional courts between 2003 and 2008, we estimate the determinants of court selection with alternative-specific conditional logit models. In line with our theoretical predictions, our empirical results show that plaintiffs prefer courts that have shorter proceedings, especially when they compete against the defendants they face. Further, we find negative effects of the plaintiff’s, as well as the defendant’s, distance to court on the plaintiff’s court selection. Our empirical analysis also allows us to infer whether plaintiffs perceive a given court as more or less pro-patentee than another one