He held that the licence had no fixed term, since Mevon was only entitled to terminate for ward`s violation, while Ward was also entitled to terminate the patents when the patents expired. He did not mention (and we assume it has not been advanced) the legal right that the licensee should have terminated when the patents expired. In accordance with Section 168 of the Patent Act 2013, any party may terminate a license to value a patented product or process once the patents that protected the product or process at the time of the patent have expired or have been revoked. We wonder if this would have changed the analysis, as it would have meant that each party could terminate the licence as soon as the patents expired. Often, the right to terminate requires that you first terminate your contractual partner and give him the opportunity to resolve the problem. The agreement sets a period (usually 30-90 days) during which the other must “cure” the problem. The “right to heal” is one of those legal terms that you will find in all kinds of commercial contracts. If we look at a hypothetical situation, our example brings it to the top to show how things can happen. Assuming that you have a licensing agreement in which the licensee`s failure to bring a licensed product to market within a specified time frame constitutes a specific breach of the agreement. If they missed this deadline, you should usually send them a late payment or violation announcement telling them what they have done wrong and demand that they resolve the situation, i.e. “cure” the problem by bringing the product to market. If the manufacturer has not resolved the problem in time, you have the option to treat the contract as terminated.

If you do, you would inform the manufacturer of the termination and why. If they were to move forward and use the artwork now without authorization, you might have to go to court to arrest them, but you would refer to the termination clause and the fact that they were not cured as the reason your application was filed. If, for some reason or reason, a contracting party can terminate the contract, it is a right of termination “for convenience.” Since most people enter into agreements to make the future more predictable, neither party is ever interested in giving others a right to terminate for convenience. On the contrary, most licensing agreements seek to keep the parties together by distributing conditions (usually misbehaviour of one party) that must exist in order for the other party to terminate the contract198, the predecessor of Mevon Pty Limited (Mevon) granted the predecessor of Ward Equipment Limited (Ward) an exclusive license to modify, adapt, manufacture, use certain construction products in New Zealand , sell, sell or do otherwise.

Ha tetszett oszd meg másokkal is:
Posted in Egyéb kategória