DiKE System der internationalen Zuständigkeit im Immaterialgüterrecht

Matters of intellectual property often have an international character. In terms of substantive law, there are numerous conventions specific to intellectual property rights; however, there are no corresponding jurisdictional counterparts. Therefore, national jurisdiction regulations and universally applicable jurisdiction agreements, such as the Lugano Convention, are applied. The jurisdictional norms related to intellectual property rights established there are based on the distinction between actions for declaration of validity and infringement claims. While the former is generally considered inadmissible to be pursued outside the state of jurisdiction, the latter is now accepted—albeit sometimes reluctantly. Consequently, intellectual property disputes, despite their often cross-border nature, face a territorial division in jurisdiction law. Why are actions for declaration of validity and infringement claims treated differently in terms of jurisdiction? What party and third-party interests are behind this? Is this differentiation necessary because the international jurisdiction of the state of jurisdiction must be exclusive for one type of claim but not for the other; if so, is this justified? This work provides answers to such system-theoretical questions and critically examines the currently applicable jurisdictional framework. It also addresses essential questions for legal practice and offers answers based on fundamental considerations, for example: Can the tort jurisdiction be located outside the state of jurisdiction? How should proceedings be handled in which the validity question covered by Article 22 No. 4 of the Lugano Convention is raised as a defense? When is the requirement of connection regarding jurisdictional links, such as the jurisdiction of co-defendants, fulfilled in intellectual property disputes?.