MEMBER-ONLY NEWS

CIOPORA Blog - central feed

China’s SPC Clarifies Scope of PVR in Highly Anticipated Decision in Pomelo Case

The Supreme People’s Court of China has handed down its decision in the highly anticipated San Hong Pomelo Plant Variety Rights Infringement Case – providing significant clarification on the scope of Plant Variety Rights in China. December 11, Beijing - The Supreme People’s Court handed down its decision on the Plant Variety Rights (PVR) infringement case of Cai Xin Guang (Appellant) vs. Guangzhou Runping Company Limited. Appellant is the holder of PVR in the pomelo variety San Hong (三红蜜柚 variety). The Appellant claimed that sales of the San Hong pomelo fruit in supermarkets infringed its PVR, claiming that the fruit falls within the definition of “propagating material” (繁殖材料) and therefore

China’s SPC Clarifies Scope of PVR in Highly Anticipated Decision in Pomelo Case

By Alanna Rennie (Baker Mckenzie, Sydney), Dr Yu Shujun (Beijing Hengda Agforest PBR Attorneys Co., Ltd. ) and Andrew Sim (Baker Mckenzie, Beijing) The Supreme People’s Court of China has handed down its decision in the highly anticipated San Hong Pomelo Plant Variety Rights Infringement Case – providing significant clarification on the scope of Plant Variety Rights in China. December 11, Beijing - The Supreme People’s Court handed down its decision on the Plant Variety Rights (PVR) infringement case of Cai Xin Guang (Appellant) vs. Guangzhou Runping Company Limited. Appellant is the holder of PVR in the pomelo variety San Hong (三红蜜柚 variety). The Appellant claimed that sales of the San Hong

Italian Court Rules against Infringer in Case of Unauthorized Tomato Propagation

Ragusa, November 20 – The Court of Ragusa sentenced an Italian grower, accused of the illegal propagation of a registered tomato variety, to one-year imprisonment and a fine of EUR 15,000 under the Article 517ter. of the Italian Criminal Code “Manufacturing and sale of goods infringing the industrial property rights”. The Court also ordered the defendant to pay damages of EUR 70,000 to the parties involved plus EUR 16,000 of legal fees. The case was initiated by the CIOPORA lawyer member Nicola Novaro on behalf of the Anti-Infringement Bureau for Intellectual Property Rights (AIB) followed by a claim filed by the variety titleholder. In the course of the investigation carried out by Guardia

CIOPORA at CPVO EOM 2019: Distinct or Just Different?

December 3, Angers - CIOPORA Secretary General Dr Edgar Krieger participated in the CPVO Meeting of Examination offices (EOM) contributing a presentation on the issue of variety distinctness. In CIOPORA's opinion, the EU Regulation 2100/94 (CPVR), discriminates two different degrees of "difference" between plant varieties: a (smaller) botanical degree which simply declares a variety different from an existing variety, irrespective of whether the conditions for the grant of a PVR are fully met. According to Article 5 of the EU Regulation 2100/94, such a variety is: defined by the expression of the characteristics that result from a given genotype or combination of genotypes, distinguished fro

SENADI Learns about Rose Breeding, Explores Co-op Opportunities with Local Breeders

Reported by Dean Rule Quito, November 29 - Santiago Cevallos, the General Director of SENADI (the Ecuadorian Intellectual Property Institute), Paulina Mosquera, the National Director of Vegetative Varieties, Edison Troyo from the Vegetative Variety Department of SENADI and Freddy Valarezo, Director of Innovation and Licensing at the ESPE University in Ecuador visited the E.G. Hill Company premises. The purpose of the visit was to explore areas of cooperation between SENADI, ESPE and the E.G. Hill rose breeding operation and to learn more about plant breeding. During the visit, presentations were given by Dean Rule and Sebastian Recalde on possible areas of cooperation, CIOPORA and its activi

PVR Exhaustion: Triggers and Limitations

By Ernst-Jan Louwers, Louwers IP|Technology Advocaten For propagation purposes, the breeder - the owner or licensee of PVRs - must make plant material available to nurseries, either directly or through his licensees. Propagated plants must then be made available to the growers for production purposes. This may lead to exhaustion of the PVRs on those plants. Picture credit: Shutterstock European Union Article 16 of the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention contains a provision on exhaustion [1]. This article provides that PVRs are exhausted when the material or the derived material has been “sold or otherwise marketed” to others either by the holder or with his consent. This rule has been implement

© 2019 by CIOPORA

  • Twitter Social Icon
  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • CIOPORA on Youtube