Judgment_paragraph 33 · Mylan AB v Gilead Sciences Finland Oy and Others (C-473/22)

33In that regard, it must be recalled that, according to settled case-law, the provisions of that directive are not intended to govern all aspects of intellectual property rights, but only those aspects inherent, first, in the enforcement of those rights and, second, in infringement of them, by requiring that there must be effective legal remedies designed to prevent, terminate or rectify any infringement of an existing intellectual property right. In so doing, the EU legislature chose to provide for minimum harmonisation concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights in general (see, to that effect, judgment of 28 April 2022, Koch Media, C‑559/20, EU:C:2022:317, paragraphs 31 and 32 and the case-law cited).

Mylan AB v Gilead Sciences Finland Oy and Others (C-473/22)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections