AGFA Graphics N.V. v. Chendu Xingraphics Co. Ltd and A. Ten Cate Offsetprodukten B.V., District Court The Hague, 11 May 2010, Case No. 361875 / KG ZA 10-359
Agfa holds a patent for a method for making positive photosensitive lithographic printing plate and claims that Xingraphics and Atece (indirectly) infringe upon that patent. In an earlier first instance decision on the merits between the same parties, the District Court of the Hague ruled that Agfa failed to prove infringement and refused the requested relief. Agfa appealed the decision, subsequently came up with new evidence and also started preliminary injunction proceedings against Xingraphics and Atece based on said new evidence.
In this decision in the preliminary injunction proceedings that followed, the President of the Court of the Hague - in reference to a 2000 Supreme Court decision (LJN AA5870) - holds that he in principle is compelled to follow the earlier decision on the merits. The President furthermore affirmed the Supreme Court decision in stating that this could be different, if the earlier decision on the merits would contain an obvious error and if the case would be so urgent that the outcome of the appeal could not be awaited. However, according to the President this was not the case. Moreover, in the opinion of the President, no circumstances appeared after the decision on the merits that would have prompted the Court in first instance to render a different decision if it had been aware of these circumstances. For all these reasons, the relief was rejected.
Read the decision (in Dutch) here.