• Blog

Coercive Sum - Benefits and Risks in Preliminary Injunction Proceedings

In the course of civil proceedings courts may temporarily regulate relations between the parties through a preliminary injunction (PI) order. For example, the PI order may consist of prohibition to market certain goods, to publish certain content, or even to use an existing name of the company. Pursuant to Article 7562(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure a court which grants a PI order may threaten the obliged party with ordering to pay a specified sum of money to the authorised party if the obligations specified in the PI order are infringed. This sum is commonly referred to as the "coercive sum" and constitutes an extremely attractive instrument for entities which initiate the proceeding.

A coercive sum is applied primarily to motivate the obliged party to execute the PI order. However, in case of non-execution or improper execution of the PI order, the coersive sum goes to the authorised party. Thus, this institution combines the function of a sanction with the compensatory function, and at the same time it replaces a fine. This peculiar combination, although beneficial for the authorised party, is undoubtedly a source of significant doubts in practice.

Continue reading

Aren’t all gingerbreads equal?

It has long been known that not all gingerbreads are equal. But what if the packaging of one brand is deceptively similar to the packaging of another brand? This issue was considered by the District Court in Katowice in a case concerning the packaging of Gellwe’s gingerbread powder and its similarity to the packaging of Dr. Oetker’s gingerbread powder.

Continue reading

On the fine line between fair competition and parasitism

On the fine line between fair competition and parasitism

The Act on Combating Unfair Competition introduces a catalogue of prohibited acts of unfair competition, which include, inter alia, imitation which may mislead, unfair advertising and false labelling of goods and services. However, it is not an exhaustive list. Currently, it is generally accepted that Article 3 of the Act on Combating Unfair Competition may constitute an independent basis for recognising an action as an act of unfair competition.

Continue reading

Epic Games v Apple

Epic Games vs Apple - giants fight over payments

Giants in the mobile app market

For several months now, we have been witnessing an extremely interesting dispute between Epic Games Inc. and Apple Inc. Although the case is being recognised in the United States, its outcome may determine the future shape of the global mobile app market. The manufacturer of iPhone and the App Store creator needs no introduction. Epic Games, on the other hand, is a well-known developer responsible for creating such titles as Gears of War or Fortnite. Epic Games is also known to gamers and game developers as the producer of one of the most popular engine series for computer games, i.e. Unreal Engine.

Apple and Epic Games have worked together for years. App Store is one of the most important platforms, along with Google Play, for providing mobile device users with access to applications created by developers, including Epic Games. The availability of games and other applications in App Store and Google Play translates to their success. As a result, the ability to work with Apple and Google largely determines an app's visibility and its developer's revenue. However, the rules governing App Store and Google Play have long been criticised by developers.

Continue reading

Towary podrobione

Counterfeit products - what can be found on shelves and what are the consequences for consumers who buy such products

Zdecydowana większość konsumentów jest świadoma występowania zjawiska kopiowania produktów, oznaczania ich podrobionymi znakami towarowymi oraz ich sprzedaży. Obecność na rynku podrobionych kosmetyków, odzieży czy obuwia jest dobrze zakorzeniona w powszechnej świadomości.  Podrabianie niektórych innych produktów może jednak być zaskoczeniem dla ich potencjalnych nabywców i prowadzić do nieświadomego nabycia towaru nieoryginalnego.

Continue reading

New intellectual property courts

As of 1 July 2020, the IP courts operate in Poland. They were established as a result of a broad reform of civil proceedings concerning handling IP matters.

 

Continue reading

Nowości w ZAIKSie

Novelties in ZAIKS

A few months ago, authors who have entrusted the management of their rights to the Society of Authors ZAIKS, received a new text of the agreement on collective management of copyrights for signing[1]. The proposed changes reflect important amendments which have been implemented to the Act on collective management of copyrights.

Continue reading

Czy marihuana przeszkadza w rejestracji?

Cannabis store note

In December 2019 the Polish Court ruled on the registrability of a trademark directly relating to cannabis. Under current law, such a trademark cannot be registered.

Continue reading


Intellectual property
and media law professionals.

al. J. Ch. Szucha 16/18
00-582 Warszawa

tel: (+48) 22 299 60 70
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

ul. Marokańska 2s lok 4
03-977 Warszawa

tel: (+48) 579 066 338
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Copyright © 2020 - Hasik Rheims & Partners