Germany: Why Torpedos have backfired

Last Updated: 25 November 2003

by Reinhardt Schuster and Clemens Rübel

A recent decision by the Hamburg District Court may end the controversial practice of taking patent cases to courts of EU countries with slow procedures.

In former years, the so-called "Italian" or "Belgian Torpedo" enjoyed rising notoriety among practitioners as a defense strategy against potential patent infringement suits in Germany. The term torpedo designates a negative declaratory action to establish non-infringement, mostly filed in certain EU countries such as Italy or Belgium, the judicial systems of which take much more time to reach a legally effective decision than in other countries, for example, Germany. Art. 24 of the Hague Convention - on which the decision of the Hamburg District Court that will be discussed in this article was partly based - served for a long time as the basis for blocking claims to injunctions for a time span of a number of years or sometimes even until the end of the life time of the patent-in-suit. By this maneuver, the torpedo-plaintiff is buying time, during which the company can market its potentially infringing product without being obstructed by property rights of third parties. An infringer would thus be gaining a competitive advantage against the patent owner, who needs to regain the expenses spent for the development of his product. In case the infringer looses the suit years later in Italy or Belgium, there is a good chance that he merely will have to pay damages to the patent owner, which will not be much higher than a reasonable license fee for utilization of the patent-in-suit (for which the patent owner might not have granted him a license voluntarily).

Such a case of an "Italien Torpedo" was subject to the above mentioned suit "Seifenverpackung" (soap packaging) at the Hamburg District Court (published in German in GRUR Int. 2002, p. 1025). The defendant in this action had sued in Milan for declaration of non-infringement by its product of, inter alia, the German part of a European patent. The plaintiff in Germany now requested a preliminary injunction at the Hamburg District Court which was swiftly issued.

In the grounds, the Court stated that the negative declaratory action in Milan had the same subject matter as the present preliminary procedure and that, for this reason, according to Art. 21 Hague Convention (today applicable for all EU countries except Denmark: Art 27, Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition of enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters, hereinafter referred to as CR 44/2001), it was not possible to instigate a main action on the merits in Germany, since the Court which was addressed later has to declare its non-competence vis-a-vis the Court which was called upon first.

Different to German procedural law, the Hague Convention assumes an equal ranking of negative and positive declaratory actions. A negative declaratory action filed earlier in another EU country takes precedence over a later filed action in Germany.

However, the District Court Hamburg decided, that on the basis of Art. 24 Hague Convention (today: Art. 31, CR 44/2001), nothing contravenes to the issuance of a preliminary injunction and that the Court is internationally competent. The essential purpose of Art. 24 Hague Convention is to prevent parallel suits before the courts of multiple member states as well as any potentially resulting contradictory decisions. A further aim is to exclude the possibility that a decision according to Art. 27(3) (new version: Art. 34(3), CR 44, 2001) is not recognized because of it being incompatible with a decision that has been rendered concerning the same parties in the state in which the claim to admission is raised. This danger of contradicting decisions, however, does not exist with preliminary injunctions which are merely preliminary rulings until the decision in the main suit is rendered.

After the Hamburg District Court had established its competence in this manner, it had to decide on the infringement and find out whether there were sufficient grounds to issue a preliminary injunction. With preliminary proceedings, there is always the problem for the court that the legal situation cannot be examined in great detail. In many cases, the defendant is also raising a nullity action or an opposition against the patent. The result of these parallel actions cannot be awaited in the preliminary procedure; only a prognosis can be given as to their chances for success. For this reason, the court has to balance the interests of the parties: It has to weigh up the interest of the plaintiff in a swift decision against the interest of the defendant, who, in case of a false decision in the preliminary procedure, would be subjected to substantial disadvantage. The larger the positive clarity of the court's view on the infringement and validity of the patent, the more reason it has for giving preference to the interest of the plaintiff.

It is an interesting aspect of the decision of the Hamburg District Court that, in the framework of weighing this balance of interests to the disadvantage of the defendant, it took into consideration that a torpedo was pending in another EU state. With this, the Hamburg District Court is confirming a former ruling of the Düsseldorf District Court (published in german inGRUR 2000, 692 ff. - "Kontrastmittel"), according to which the interest of a patentee in a preliminary injunction is getting stronger, the longer he has to wait for a decision in the main suit. The Düsseldorf Court comments: "Already the latter legal aspect is pointing toward the direction that, in case of conflict, urgency is to be affirmed." In other words: While a torpedo in itself may not constitute a reason for a preliminary injunction, it carries considerable weight in the balancing of interests and thus leads, in controversial cases, to a sentence of the opponent to the claim, in particular, in cases when the possibility of an imminent filing for an action for performance (compensation) would lead to a rejection of the claim for a preliminary injunction.

The present decision gives reason to rethink the practice of instigating torpedo actions. This tactic was developed at a time when it was commonly understood to be practically impossible to get a preliminary injunction in patent matters. The legal and factual circumstance of patent cases were deemed to be too complex to be examined in depth in an accelerated procedure, in particular, if the validity of the patent was challenged. This assessment is no longer valid today. Over the time, the requirements with respect to the patent-in-suit have progressively diminished to the advantage of the plaintiff. With regard to the validity of the patent-in-suit, the Hamburg District Court is only speaking of "the revocation of the patent being imminent with a high degree of probability." For the attorney of the defendant in the preliminary procedure, this results in an enormous increase of the requirements for demonstrating the invalidity of the attacked patent, in comparison to the general opinion of some decades ago that the validity of a patent must be "beyond any doubt".

Consequently, a torpedo may prevent the instigation of a main suit in Germany, but the owner of the patent is almost forced to claim as quickly as possible a preliminary injunction against the torpedo-plaintiff and potential infringer, because if the patent owner is waiting longer than one or a few months (depending on the court), then the chances for the issuance of a preliminary injunction will rapidly decrease, since the patent owner is demonstrating that he is not diligent in enforcing his rights and, therefore, an accelerated procedure will not seem necessary in the eyes of the court. The torpedo plaintiff is thus confronted very quickly with an accelerated procedure in the country he intended to "block" and in which he is in a disadvantageous position legally as well as psychologically: torpedos are instigated in order to prevent a law suit in Germany which one fears to loose , and are therefore, so to speak, a sign of bad conscience.

For this reason it is questionable whether torpedos still make sense. While it is still true that in an accelerated procedure, the chances of the patent owner are smaller than in a main suit, the danger of a preliminary injunction is increasing. It has to be taken into consideration that in the torpedo brief, information may be disclosed which can be used to the disadvantage of the defendant in the German preliminary injunction procedure. Additionally, there is the danger, that in cases in which the deadline for the instigation of an accelerated procedure has already lapsed, a preliminary injunction could still be issued, because the torpedo has brought about a change of circumstance, reviving "urgency". However, this question has not yet been definitely resolved by the higher instance courts.

From the torpedo-plaintiff's point of view, notwithstanding the considerable costs of a long drawn-out procedure in Italy or Belgium, the consequences of a preliminary injunction in Germany (the chances of which have been increased by the torpedo), are now more drastic: A preliminary injunction is only a preliminary decision and is only effective until a non-preliminary, main action has been decided with the same subject matter between the same parties. Since a main action in Germany is prevented by the Belgian or Italian torpedo, the preliminary injunction remains valid until the torpedo is decided. And this can take years.

Thus, the tables are turning. The defendant in the torpedo suit now has all the time in the world and will try to delay the procedure as long as possible - in order to maintain the effects of the preliminary injunction proceedings as long as possible - as the torpedo plaintiff would have done, if it would not have come to the injunction against him, in order to prevent a main action in German as long as possible. In this sense, the torpedo has indeed backfired.

© by Reinhardt Schuster and Clemens Rübel 2003. This article was first published in Managing Intellectual Property July/August 2003.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions