WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  IP/N/6/CHE/1/Add.2 
22 September 2006 
 
 (06-4503) 
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights Original:    English 
 
 
 
CHECKLIST OF ISSUES ON ENFORCEMENT1 
 
Responses from Switzerland  
  
Addendum  
   The following communication, dated 22 August 2006,  is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Switzerland.  It contains statistical  information on enforcement of intellectual property 
rights in Switzerland for the years 2002 and 2003. 
 
____________ 
 
 
I. Introductory Statement 
 
 Civil and criminal enforcement procedures in Sw itzerland are mainly governed by procedural 
laws of the Cantons, by the Federal Law on Jurisd iction and the Federal Law on the Organization of 
the Judicial System (OJ), unless the federal intellectual property laws contain specific provisions for the enforcement of IPRs. 
 
 Decisions concerning the civil and criminal enforcement of IPRs are made, in the first 
instance, by the higher Swiss distri ct courts (cantonal courts).  Decisions of the cantonal courts may 
be appealed to the Supreme Federal Court.   In the area of acquisition and maintenan ce of trademarks, patents and geographical 
indications, special administrative and opposition pro cedures are available. He re, the Federal Appeals 
Committee, known as “Commission de recours en matière  de propriété intellectuelle”, has jurisdiction 
in the area of trademarks and patents and its decisions in opposition cases are final.  In cases of geographical indications for agricultural products  and processed agricultural products, the Federal 
Agricultural Office renders decisions on opposition to the registration of a geographical indication.  
The Commission for Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications advises the Federal 
Agricultural Office and the decisions of the latter are subject to appeal to the Supreme Federal Court. 
  For further details on Swiss enforcement proce dures, reference is made to the replies from 
Switzerland to the ‘Checklist of Issues on Enforcement’ in document IP/N/6/CHE/1 of 
16 October 1997. 
  Statistical information on the civil, criminal  and administrative enforcement of IPRs in 
Switzerland for the years 2002 and 2003 is set forth below.  Included are decisions of the civil and criminal courts at the cantonal level, the decisi ons of the Federal Appeals Committee and the Supreme 
                                                     
 
1 Document IP/C/5. 
 IP/N/6/CHE/1/Add.2 
Page 2  
 
  Federal Court.  Statistical information does not  include cases in which IPRs were invoked by the 
plaintiff but where the court’s findings conclude on  violation(s) of competition, antitrust or company 
law instead. 
  
II. Statistical information 2002  
 
a) Explanatory remarks 
 
 In the field of trademarks, the cantonal judicial authorities communicated 34 cases (15 of them on provisional measures).  Tw enty-eight of the 34 cases were decided on the merits of the case. 
In 12 cases, the claims were approved, whereas in 16 cases, they were denied. In the remaining cases, 
a settlement was agreed between the parties (2), th e plaintiff withdrew his claim (3) or the case was 
dismissed (1).  The Federal Appeals Committee re ndered 58 decisions.  In 20 cases, the appeal was 
approved, in 19 cases, the appeal was denied. Fifteen  cases were settled by the parties or withdrawn 
and four cases were dismissed.  The Supreme Federa l Court denied seven appeals and approved one. 
 
 In the field of copyright and neighboring ri ghts, the cantonal courts rendered 14 decisions, 
four of them on provisional measures. Eleven cases where decided on the merits of the case (7 approvals and 4 denials). The remaining cases were either settled by agreement between the 
parties (2) or dismissed (1).  Seizure of infringing material was ordered in various instances.  The Supreme Federal Court denied one and approved one appeal. 
 
 In the field of trademark and copyrights, th e customs authorities intervened in 69 occasions 
and seized goods for a total value of Sw F 3.5 million.   In the field of patents, the cantonal judicial authorities communicated nine decisions (four of 
them on provisional measures).  The cantonal courts decided seven cases on the merits of the case 
(three approvals and four denials).  Two cases we re dismissed.  The Federal Appeals Committee 
rendered four decisions, one approving and the other one denying the claim. Two cases were 
dismissed. The Federal Supreme Court denied all three appeals that were made in 2002. 
  Finally, in the field of designs, the one request for provisional measures that was reported was 
denied by the cantonal courts. 
 
b) The figures for the year 2002 
 
IPRs/authority Cantonal Courts 
Decisions/prov. 
measures Customs 
interventions  Fed. Appeals 
Committee 
 Supreme Fed. 
Court 
Trademarks 
 34/15 69 58 8 
Copyright+NRs 
 14/4  0* 2 
Patents 
 9/4 ** 4* 3 
Designs 
 1/1 0 0* 0 
* No special administrative opposition procedur e for holders of prior rights available  
** No border measures available for patent infringing goods 
  IP/N/6/CHE/1/Add.2 
 Page 3 
 
 
  III. Statistical information 2003  
 
a) Explanatory remarks 
 
 In the field of trademarks, the cantonal judicial authorities communicated 42 cases (16 of 
them on provisional measures).  Out of these 42 cases, 29 where decided on the merits of the case: 
Infringement of a trademark was approved in 20 cases and denied in nine cases. In the other 13 cases, 
either a settlement was agreed between the parties (3 ) or the plaintiff withdrew his claim (10).  The 
Federal Appeals Committee rendered 84 decisions.  Si xty-four cases where decided on the merits of 
the case (13 decisions approving and 51 decisions denying the claims), 19 cases were settled by the 
parties or withdrawn and 1 case was dismissed.  The Supreme Federal Court denied six appeals and 
approved two.   In the field of copyright and neighboring ri ghts, the cantonal judicial courts rendered 
23 decisions (13 of them on provisional measures). Nineteen cases were decided on the merits of the 
case: A violation of copyright was approved in 11 of these cases, in eight cases, the claim was denied. 
In the four remaining cases, the claim was dismissed (1), a settlement was agreed (1) or the plaintiff 
withdrew his claim (2).  Seizure of infringing mate rial was ordered in various instances. The Supreme 
Federal Court denied four appeals and approved one.   In the field of trademark and copyrights, th e customs authorities intervened in 212 occasions 
and seized goods for a total value of Sw F 3.7 million.   In the majority of cases, disputes were settled. 
  In the field of patents, the cantonal judicial authorities communicated 26 cases (four of them on provisional measures).  The cantonal courts rende red 16 decisions on the merits of the case, ten of 
them granted provisional measures or approved patent violations, six of them denied the claims.  In 
the ten remaining cases, a settlement was agreed (9) between the parti es or the plaintiff withdrew his 
claim (1).  The Federal Appeals Committee rendered one decision, dismissing the claim.  The Federal 
Supreme Court denied five appeals and approved two. 
  Finally, in the field of designs, the cantona l judicial authorities communicated six cases (one 
on provisional measures).  One of these cases was approved, the other five were denied. 
 
b) The figures for the year 2003 
 
IPRs/authority Cantonal Courts 
Decisions/prov. 
measures Customs 
interventions  Fed. Appeals 
Committee 
 Supreme Fed. 
Court 
Trademarks 
 42/16 212 84 8 
Copyright+NRs 
 23/13  0* 5  
Patents 
 26/4 ** 1* 7  
Designs 
 6/1 0 0* 0 
* No special administrative opposition procedur e for holders of prior rights available 
** No border measures available for patent infringing goods 
 
__________