• (230) 4278861, 4260399

Enforcement of IPRs in Denmark


Enforcement of IPRs
The personal consumption of counterfeits is not punishable in Denmark - only the sale of such goods is; therefore, a liberal approach is followed. Furthermore, importing counterfeits is allowed if its value is less than 430 €.
Footwear and smart phones are the goods that most often face counterfeiting and piracy in Denmark.
They are as follows:
  • The Consolidate Patents Act
  • The Consolidate Utility Models Act
  • The Consolidate Designs Act
  • The Consolidate Trademark Act
  • The Consolidate Act on Collective Marks,
  • The Protection of the Topographies of Semiconductor Products Act
  • The Consolidate Act on Copyright
  • The Consolidate Act on Plants
Patents, utility models, trademarks, copyright, designs, and plant varieties are the different types of IPRs protected by IPR enforcement in Denmark.
Proceedings are carried out in Danish and there is no choice of language. However, parties from the Nordic countries (Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) can submit documents and testimony in their native languages.
To overcome the limitation imposed by the operational language, witness examinations can be carried out in a foreign language if an authorised translator is used or if the court has sufficient knowledge of the language in question. Therefore, a translator can enable ease of judicial proceedings.
Furthermore, It is advisable to send a cease and desist letter before commencing copyright infringement proceedings. If the defendant has not been made aware of the infringement before commencing proceedings, and if the defendant admits the claim, the claimant can be ordered to bear not only its own but also the defendant's litigation costs.
Yes. The statute of limitations for claiming damages is 03 years from the time the damages occurred.
A) Government Authorities - Yes
B) Police Officials - Yes
C) Judiciary - Yes
D) Customs - Yes
A) Injunctions - Yes
B) Monetary Compensation - Yes
C) Raids - Yes
D) Seizures - Yes
E) Destruction - Yes
The usual timeframe for ordinary infringement proceedings is approximately 12 to 18 months, with a possible further 12 months if the first-instance court judgment is appealed. The timeframe for preliminary injunction proceedings is approximately 01 to 06 months.
Punitive damages are not allowed under Danish Law. In certain instances, the punishment may not be deterrent enough.
A) Responsible Authority - Maritime and Commercial High Court (or the District Court)
B) Imprisonment Term – Up to 1.5 years for trademark infringement, up to 18 months for copyright infringement, which may increase up to 06 years, and 1.5 years for patent infringement.
C) Monetary Fine - Costs are granted following a more or less fixed schedule made by the courts based on the value of the case. Such costs are significantly lower than the actual costs held by the winning party.
In practice, criminal proceedings are only initiated in exceptional cases. Hence, although action may be immediate against infringing acts, it may still be less deterrent.
The initiation of arbitration proceedings requires that an agreement thereon has been concluded between the parties. If the parties did not have a contractual relationship prior to the occurrence of the matter in question (for instance, an alleged infringement of a trademark or patent) - arbitration will usually not be available (unless both parties agree to arbitration when the dispute arises); however, if the matter in question is concerned with the violation or breach of a licence agreement concern, then under the Danish Arbitration Act No 553 of 24 June 2005, as amended, parties can agree to resolve their disputes by arbitration.
The remedies available under border control measures (customs) in Denmark include the destruction of infringing goods.
The holder of the decision should reimburse all the costs incurred by the customs authorities in taking action to enforce his intellectual property rights. Nevertheless, this should not preclude the holder of the decision from seeking compensation from the infringer or other persons who might be considered liable under the legislation of the Member State where the goods were found.
The goods may be released for commercial access if an IP rights holder abuses the enforcement measures in Custom Recordal of IPRs.
The judicial court system