Brazil: Brazil offers attractive battleground for enforcing patents

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Brazil: Brazil offers attractive battleground for enforcing patents

Sponsored by

daniel-400px.png

Although the amount of patent litigation in Brazil is far from the level of litigation in the US, patent infringement actions are very common in the jurisdiction. Such actions are the most effective measure against infringers, since preliminary injunctions are widely available. This makes Brazil very attractive as an additional battlefield for worldwide patent disputes.

Brazil has a truly independent judiciary system, and judges are doing their best to enforce the rule of law. In contrast to other BRICS countries, there is no bias against foreign companies. A great number of infringement actions initiated against local companies are filed by foreign entities, and their chances of success are basically the same as those of any other plaintiff.

In comparison with the US, the standards for obtaining injunctive relief in Brazil are much lower than one might expect as, for instance, there is no need to give notice to the defendant, and the parties are allowed to have ex parte in chambers meetings with the judges, meaning that plaintiffs are often able to obtain preliminary injunctive relief even before the defendants are served with the summons. In certain places, for example, Rio de Janeiro, plaintiffs are able to obtain injunctions more often than not.

Moreover, obtaining preliminary injunctive relief is possible even if the asserted patents cover standard-essential technologies, as in Vringo v ZTE and Ericsson v TCT. In both cases, the defendants were prevented from manufacturing, using, selling, offering and importing the infringing goods in Brazil. A preliminary injunction may also include search and seizure measures or orders for the defendant to present copies of contracts and other relevant documents, as well as notifications to third parties and to customs authorities to make relevant information about their dealings with the defendant available.

Generally, to obtain injunctive relief, the plaintiff must present sufficient documentary evidence to establish (i) the likelihood of eventually prevailing on the merits and (ii) that the result sought with the lawsuit could be frustrated or harmed if an injunction is not granted (i.e. the plaintiff must establish that granting the preliminary injunction is an urgent matter). Alternative ways of obtaining preliminary injunctions occur when the plaintiff is able to establish that the defendant is presenting defences and objections in an abusive way, or that the defendant is trying to delay the proceedings, or if the defendant is not able to create reasonable doubt regarding the facts alleged by the plaintiff.

Additionally, in order to maximise the chances of obtaining an injunction, it is usual for plaintiffs to present several technical opinions from well-known local and foreign experts, normally professors teaching at renowned universities, in support of their arguments.

In a nutshell, the lower standards for obtaining preliminary injunctive relief make Brazil a very favourable battleground to enforce patent rights in global litigation. This is an opportunity for non-practising entities (NPEs) and a substantial risk for corporations facing infringement claims.

Ricardo Nunes

Daniel Legal & IP Strategy

Av. República do Chile,

230, 3rd Floor

Centro, Rio de Janeiro

20031-170, Brazil

Tel: +55 21 2102 4212

www.daniel-ip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

More important FRAND decisions by the UK courts and a changing of the guard for Siemens’ IP team were among the top talking points this week
Operating profit decreased from £968,942 to £5,254, but the firm expects long-term investments to pay off for clients
One of the litigators expects that she’ll have to help clients navigate challenges posed by USPTO developments
Counsel explain what kind of ITC-related inquiries they’re getting from clients and why complaints at the forum were up in 2024
A ruling concerning a juicing machine, a tussle over a preliminary injunction and a new judge in Paris were among the top talking points this fortnight
John Squires has had a range of in-house and private practice experience, most recently in the IP group at Dilworth Paxson
President Donald Trump’s attacks on Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling should not go unchallenged
The combined entity, which is expected to offer IP services across Australia and New Zealand, will be called Jones Maxwell Smith & Davis
The Iconix v Dream Pairs dispute, to be heard at the UK Supreme Court, concerns trademarks owned by sports brand Umbro and the issue of post-sale confusion
The European IP team from Simmons & Simmons discusses the current approaches to IP enforcement against look-a-like or copycat products
Gift this article