Skip to main content
Log in

“Pallet Container III” (Palettenbehälter III)

European Patent Convention, Art. 69; Patent Act, Sec. 14

  • Decision · Patent Law
  • Germany
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A solution differing from the literal sense of the patent claim is only equivalent if it not only essentially achieves the overall effect of the invention but also achieves precisely that effect that is meant to be achieved by the feature not implemented literally. If the construction of the patent claim discloses minimum requirements of a specific effect in terms of quantity or quality, modified means that do not satisfy these requirements cannot be regarded as equivalent in the sense of a less advantageous solution even if all the other effects of the patented solution are essentially achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. Published in 44 IIC 351 2013, DOI 10.1007/s40319-013-0044-3.

Author information

Consortia

Additional information

Official headnotes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Decision of the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) 17 July 2012 – Case No. X ZR 113/11. “Pallet Container III” (Palettenbehälter III). IIC 44, 457–463 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-013-0053-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-013-0053-2

Navigation