26 - 27 November, 2019 | Millennium Gloucester Hotel London Kensington, London, United Kingdom

View All Speakers

Dr. Matthias Zigann

Presiding Judge
Regional Court Munich I

Dr. Matthias Zigann is Presiding Judge at the Regional Court Munich I. There he is heading the 7th (patent) division since December 2012. After a three years fellowship at the Max-Planck-Institute for Innovation and Competition in Munich he served as a public prosecutor in Landshut for four years and as a regular member of the 7th division of the Regional Court Munich I for six years. Before his appointment as presiding judge he had been delegated to serve as a research associate (= wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) with the Xth civil (patent) division of the German Federal Court of Justice (= BGH) in Karlsruhe for three years. He is co-author of Haedicke/Timmann “Handbuch des Patentrechts” and Cepl/Voss “Prozesskommentar zum Gewerblichen Rechtsschutz” and a frequent speaker at national and international IP conferences. He has also participated in several UPC mock trials.

Check out the incredible speaker line-up to see who will be joining Matthias.

Download The Latest Agenda

Day One

Tuesday, November 26th, 2019

10:10 Dual Discussion:- A Look Into The Crystal Ball

· When will the German Constitutional Complaint be decided and how?

· Will the UK participate?

· Do we still need a Unified Patent Court and a Unitary Patent?

· Is there still the political will to make it happen?

10:45 Injunctions in Germany - Really Automatic?

Public belief has it that German courts generally and “automatically” grant injunctions if they find a patent infringed. The presentation will outline the current situation and discuss possible changes to the law and court practice in view to industry concerns in cases involving live saving or complex products.

· Exceptions to the “automatic” grant of injunctive relief in preliminary and main proceedings

· Anti-trust and mandatory license defense in the life-sciences

· Preliminary enforceability

· Shortfalls of the enforcement procedure

· The injunction gap

· Possible changes to the law and court practice