Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Case C‑99/15

Christian Liffers

v

Producciones Mandarina SL

and

Mediaset España Comunicación SA

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Directive 2004/48/EC — Article 13(1) — Audiovisual work — Infringing activity — Damages — Rules for calculation — Lump sum — Moral prejudice — Inclusion’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 17 March 2016

1. EU law — Interpretation — Methods — Literal, systematic and teleological interpretation
2. Approximation of laws — Enforcement of intellectual property rights — Directive 2004/48 — Measures, procedures and remedies — Award of damages — Damage for which compensation is available — Meaning — Non-material damage — Included

   (European Parliament and Council Directive 2004/48, Art. 13(1), first para.)

1. See the text of the decision.

   (see para. 14)
2. Article 13(1) of Directive 2004/48 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights must be interpreted as permitting a party injured by an intellectual property infringement, who claims compensation for his material damage as calculated, in accordance with heading (b) of the second subparagraph of Article 13(1) of that directive, on the basis of the amount of royalties or fees which would have been due to him if the infringer had requested his authorisation to use that right, also to claim compensation for the moral prejudice that he has suffered, as provided for under heading (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 13(1) of that directive.

   In the light of the objectives of Directive 2004/48, the first subparagraph of Article 13(1) of that directive must be interpreted as establishing the principle that the calculation of the amount of damages to be paid to the holder of the intellectual property right must seek to ensure that the latter is compensated in full for the actual prejudice suffered by him, which also includes any moral prejudice. However, setting the amount of damages due as a lump sum on the basis of hypothetical royalties alone covers only the material damage suffered by the intellectual property rightholder concerned; consequently, for the purposes of providing compensation in full, that rightholder must be able to seek, in addition to the damages thus calculated, compensation for any moral prejudice which he has suffered.

   (see paras 25-27, operative part)

[Top](#document1)