Abstract

The Act of 13 February 2020 amending the Code of Civil Procedure and certain other acts, which introduces provisions allowing for a separate procedure in intellectual property cases thus starting a new chapter in asserting protection of intellectual property rights, came into force as of 1 July 2020. As of that date specialized intellectual property courts have begun operating in Poland – first instance courts (divisions of regional courts) operate in Warsaw, Poznań, Katowice, Lublin and Gdańsk, while appellate courts have been established in Warsaw and Poznań. In addition, a technical court has been set up at the court in Warsaw, which shall consider more technically complicated cases. This court is the intellectual property court at the Regional Court in Warsaw, which is the only intellectual property court in Poland to consider disputes concerning computer programmes, inventions, utility models, topography of integrated circuits, plant varieties and technical trade secrets.The list of cases to be considered by new courts is quite extensive and includes cases concerning: 1) protection of copyrights and neighbouring rights; 2) protection of industrial property rights (e.g. inventions, utility models, industrial designs, trademarks); 3) protection of other non-material property rights; 4) prevention and counteracting unfair competition; 5) personal interests to the extent in which personal rights are used for personalization, advertising or promotion of entrepreneurs, goods or services and 6) personal interests in connection with scientific or inventive activity. The provisions of the Act of 13 February 2020 introduce also new procedural instruments to be used by the plaintiff or the defendant in court proceedings. These include new means of evidencing intellectual property violations (obtaining evidence) and new means of defence against the charges of violation of those rights.Looking from the viewpoint of the defendant, the Act has introduced so-called special actions as an instrument of defence or prevention for a defendant or a potential defendant in an intellectual property case.One of them is a counterclaim which assumes that in cases concerning violation of the right to a trademark or industrial design counterclaim is admissible providing it includes a demand to invalidate a trademark protection right or find it expired, or a demand to invalidate an industrial design registration right. Another is a counterclaim for finding that there has been no violation, that the activities undertaken or intended by the entity doe no violate a patent, an additional protection right, protection right or registration right. The commented amendment is not free from dubitable or interpretationally disputable provisions. That is why the approaching months and the jurisdictional practice in the making in the intellectual property courts are so important.