<h3>Switzerland Passes Law to Improve the Quality of Swiss Patents</h3>
<h3>A. The Making of</h3>
<h4>1. Aim to Strengthen the Swiss National Patent</h4>
<p>Today, Parliament unanimously passed the revision of the Swiss Patent Act («Motion Hefti»). Certain stakeholders criticized that, under the current law, Swiss national patents are granted by the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) without an examination of novelty and inventive step, forcing inventors seeking a fully examined patent to apply for a European patent. This situation was considered unsatisfactory, especially for small and medium-sized companies interested in reliable local patent protection. A need was identified for a national property right comparable in quality to the European patent.</p>
<h4>2. Relevance of Swiss National Patent</h4>
<p>Looking at the actual number of Swiss national patents in force, one might question the need for this revision. At first glance, Swiss national patents seem to be of limited relevance compared to European patents. In 2023, 5,934 national patents were in force, compared to 145,627 European patents with effect in Switzerland. National patents thus only account for about 4% to 5%.</p>
<p>However, it would be wrong to conclude that national patents are insignificant and the efforts to strengthen the patent unnecessary, therefore. For certain users and generally local industries, the national patent fulfills a considerable function in protecting innovation. A look at the statistics of the Federal Patent Court shows that national patents were involved in 36% of all ordinary proceedings in 2023. This compares to 55% of cases involving European patents with effect in Switzerland. Similarly, in summary proceedings, the ratio is 25% national patents against 67% European patents.</p>
<p>Although these statistics should be viewed with caution, as all supplementary protection certificates are counted as Swiss patents even if their respective basic patent is an European patent, they tend to confirm that national patents play more than just an insignificant role in Switzerland. Swiss national patents are disproportionately important for the enforcement of innovation protection.</p>
<h4>3. Consultation and Legislative Proposal</h4>
<p>The first legislative draft proposed (i) to subject Swiss national patents to a mandatory full patent examination, including novelty and inventive step, (ii) to extend the grounds for opposition to lack of novelty and lack of inventive step, and (iii) to provide for an appeal procedure before the Federal Administrative Court. In addition, the introduction of a Swiss utility model was proposed as a cost-effective replacement for the current national patent, which is not fully examined.</p>
<p>The consultation showed that stakeholders supported the general thrust of improving the quality of the Swiss national patent, but there was also a widespread desire to simplify the initial legislative proposal and its proposed innovations.</p>
<p>The modified draft presented on November 16, 2022, took into account the criticisms expressed in the consultation. The idea of introducing a utility model was dropped. However, the objective of strengthening the Swiss national patent remained. The modified draft included the possibility to request a full examination, including novelty and inventive step. In addition, the goal of increasing legal certainty was taken into account with the proposal to introduce a mandatory and publishable prior art search by the IPI for all patent applications. The modified draft also proposed to abolish the opposition procedure and to provide for a direct appeal to a court, namely the Federal Patent Court instead of the Federal Administrative Court as originally envisaged.</p>
<p>Another widely recognized wish of users of the Swiss patent system, the possibility of obtaining a Swiss national patent in English instead of in a national language, also found its way into the draft bill. Finally, the opportunity of an ongoing revision of the law was used to harmonize the language of the patent law and to make largely uncontroversial amendments.</p>
<p>The most important changes introduced by the new law are briefly described below. Some of these changes still have to be specified by the Federal Council in an ordinance. It is currently expected that the new law will enter into force in mid-2026.</p>
<h3>B. Amendments to the PatA</h3>
<h4>1. New Ground for Invalidity</h4>
<p>The current list of grounds for invalidity does not include the extension of the scope of protection. Even under current law, patents can only be limited, not extended. However, violations of this principle did not lead to the invalidity of the patent.</p>
<p>This will change with the addition of a new ground for invalidity corresponding to Article 138(d) EPC. The new ground is introduced in Article 26(1) PatA as letter c<sup>bis</sup>. Like all grounds for invalidity under Swiss patent law, this ground applies equally to Swiss patents and Swiss designations of European patents.</p>
<h4>2. Mandatory Prior Art Search</h4>
<p>Under the new Patent Act, the IPI must prepare a prior art report for each patent application (new Article 57a PatA). As a rule, the prior art report will be published together with the patent application (new Article 58a(2) PatA) and filed in the patent file. It is the intention of the legislator that the applicant and third parties should be able to assess on the basis of this report whether they wish to request a full examination of a patent application. With this amendment, the legislator also intends to provide more legal certainty for patents for which a full examination is not requested and which are therefore granted without an assessment of novelty and inventive step. The prior art search report provides valuable information to parties confronted with the patent as to whether the invention may meet the requirements of novelty and inventiveness.</p>
<p>The new law provides that the IPI may, in exceptional cases and under conditions to be determined by the Federal Council by ordinance, dispense with the preparation of a prior art report (new Article 57a(3) and (4) PatA). The Dispatch on the amendment already outlined what such exceptional cases might be. In particular, it should be possible to dispense with a prior art report if sufficient documentation on the prior art is already available, e.g. EPO reports on a priority application with identical or sufficiently similar patent claims.</p>
<h4>3. Optional Full Examination</h4>
<p>In the future, the applicant or any other person may request a full examination of the patent application for novelty and inventive step (new Article 58b(2) PatA). The request for examination must be filed within six months of the publication of the prior art report (new Article 58b(3) PatA). Once filed, a request for a full examination cannot be withdrawn (new Article 58b(4) PatA).</p>
<p>Third-party requests for full examination will only be considered if the applicant has first requested substantive examination. This prevents third parties from forcing the full examination of a patent application that the applicant does not wish to pursue. By filing a request for a full examination, third parties do not become parties to the proceedings (new Article 58b(5) PatA).</p>
<h4>4. No Intra-Administrative Opposition, but Possibility of Direct Appeal</h4>
<p>The new legislation abolishes the possibility of filing an internal administrative opposition against decisions of the IPI (old Article 59c PatA). The procedure has never been used since its existence. Instead, under the new law, appeals against decisions of the IPI may be filed directly with the Federal Patent Court (new Article 59c PatA). This applies to both formal examination and full examination decisions.</p>
<p>Under the new law, third parties may appeal decisions without having to demonstrate a special interest if they claim that the subject matter of the patent is excluded from patentability under Articles 1a, 1b and 2. These articles exclude from patentability the human body, gene sequences and inventions the exploitation of which would offend human dignity or otherwise be contrary to public policy or morality. Third-party appeals based on other grounds of invalidity require the appellant to show that he or she is significantly affected by the decision and has a vested interest worthy of protection.</p>
<p>Third-party appeals do not have a suspensive effect in general, while the appeal initiated by the applicant has. Upon request, third-party appeals can also be granted a suspensive effect.</p>
<p>The time limit for filing an appeal is four months from the publication of the grant of the patent. This differs both from the nine-month time limit known for oppositions at the EPO and from the usual 30-day time limit in administrative proceedings.</p>
<h4>5. Swiss Patent in English</h4>
<p>The new law provides for the possibility of applying for and obtaining Swiss national patents in English (new Article 58a(4) PatA). This should enable applicants to save on translation costs and to avoid translation errors which could have a negative impact on the scope of protection or the validity of the patent. Only the title of the invention and the abstract still need to be translated into an official Swiss language (new Article 60(4) PatA).</p>
<h4>6. Fees</h4>
<p>The amendments, namely the full examination and the mandatory prior art search report, will have an impact on the costs for applicants and third parties.</p>
<p>At this time, it is envisaged that the fee for the full examination will have to be borne by the party requesting the examination, and it is anticipated that the new mandatory search will require an adjustment to the existing fee regulation. However, these adjustments will not be implemented in the Patent Act. Rather, the IPI is responsible for setting the fees (Article 41 PatA) and the necessary changes will be reflected in the relevant ordinances. It is therefore not yet clear to what extent the changes will affect search and examination fees.</p>
<p>The IPI expects to incur additional costs of between 0.6 and 2.1 million Swiss francs. This estimate assumes that the filing fee of currently CHF 200 for a patent with ten claims and the search and examination fee of currently CHF 500 will not increase significantly after the new law enters into force. In its Dispatch, the Federal Council emphasizes that an increase in fees to compensate for these one-time costs would contradict the principle that one-time patent fees should be kept to a minimum and should not necessarily cover costs. Instead, the Federal Council considers it more pragmatic to use the annual maintenance fees as a means to cover the additional financial burden resulting from the legislative changes.</p>
<p>The maintenance fees, which currently start at CHF 100 in year 4 and rise to CHF 960 in year 20, would need to be increased by between 2% and 8% to adequately cover the expected increase in costs. The projections indicate a return to the level of fees before 2020, when the fees were reduced.</p>


Bulletin Raising the bar à la Suisse

Raising the bar à la Suisse

<p>On December 21, 2023, the European Court of Justice (<strong>ECJ</strong>) handed down two long-awaited landmark judgments that provide new clarity and guidance on the applicability of competition law to governing bodies in the field of sport. Both cases focus on whether sports governing bodies can make competitions subject to prior approval by the respective body and impose sanctions on athletes and clubs that participate in unauthorized competitions.</p>
<h3>1. The Judgments: European Superleague and Ice Skating Union</h3>
<h4>1.1 Overview</h4>
<p>The first case (C-333/21) concerns the project to create a European Superleague (<strong>ESL</strong>). In 2021, twelve clubs from England, Spain and Italy, which together formed the European Superleague Company (<strong>ESLC</strong>), announced their plans to create a new football competition at European level: the ESL. Football&#8217;s European governing bodies, namely UEFA (the Union of European Football Associations) and FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association), refused to recognize the project and threatened to impose sanctions under their respective statutes on clubs and players who might decide to participate. The ESLC brought an action against FIFA and UEFA before the Commercial Court of Madrid, arguing that FIFA&#8217;s and UEFA&#8217;s rules on the approval of competitions and the exploitation of media rights infringe EU law. The Spanish court referred questions to the ECJ.</p>
<p>The second case (C-124/21 P) concerned an appeal by the International Skating Union (<strong>ISU</strong>) against a decision of the General Court (<strong>GC</strong>). The International Skating Union (<strong>ISU</strong>) is the only international sports federation recognized by the International Olympic Committee (<strong>IOC</strong>) in the field of figure skating and speed skating. Confirming an infringement decision of the European Commission, the GC found that ISU&#8217;s rules, which require its prior approval for the organization of international competitions and provide for severe penalties on athletes who participate in unauthorized competitions, constituted an infringement of competition law.</p>
<p>As the ISU appealed a decision of the GC, the ECJ&#8217;s decision on that case is final, while the ESL case was referred by the ECJ back to the commercial Court in Madrid, where it is expected that the reasoning of the ECJ will be applied and further specified.</p>
<p>The conclusions drawn by the ECJ in both cases apply generally to sports federations beyond these individual cases. The following sections will focus on briefly analyzing the reasoning of the ECJ in the ESL case.</p>
<h4>1.2 Applicability of EU Competition Law to Sport</h4>
<p>In its deliberations in the ESL case, the ECJ first examined the applicability of EU (competition) law to sport and the activities of sports federations, recalling that the practice of sport, insofar as it constitutes an economic activity, is subject to the provisions of EU law. It expressly stated that UEFA and FIFA are engaged in an economic activity consisting of the organization and marketing of international football competitions and the exploitation of the various rights associated with those competitions, which makes those activities subject to EU competition law. Against this background, the ECJ first clarified that UEFA and FIFA are to be categorized as ‘undertakings&#8216; and &#8218;associations of undertakings&#8216; within the meaning of EU competition law (Article 102 and 101 TFEU, respectively), to the extent that they engage in economic activities such as the organization of competitions and the exploitation of the rights related thereto. Second, the ECJ examined whether the adoption by UEFA and FIFA of rules on the prior approval of, and participation in, interclub football competitions under penalty of sanctions could be considered to amount to an abuse of a dominant position under Article 102 TFEU and/or to an anti-competitive agreement under Article 101 TFEU.</p>
<h4>1.3 Analysis Under Article 102 TFEU</h4>
<p>The ECJ examined whether the rules of the sports federations, which make competitions subject to prior approval and impose sanctions on athletes and clubs participating in unauthorized competitions, constitute an abuse of a dominant position under Article 102. In this context, it should be noted, that although the ECJ did not explicitly examine the question of whether UEFA or FIFA hold a dominant position, the ECJ assumed that this is the case, both factually and legally, since the referring commercial court of Madrid appears to have taken this position.</p>
<p>Next, the ECJ recognized that there are specific considerations which allow the conclusion to be drawn that it is legitimate to subject the organization and conduct of international professional football competitions to common rules when they are intended to ensure the homogeneity and coordination of such competitions and to promote the conduct of sporting competitions on the basis of equal opportunities and merit. The ECJ also recognized that it is legitimate to ensure compliance with such common rules by means of sanctions, such as those of the sports federations under scrutiny, which require the prior approval of such competitions and of the participation of clubs and players.</p>
<p>Crucially, the ECJ held that «<em>rules on prior approval and participation are thus legitimate in the specific context of professional football and the economic activities to which the practice of that sport gives rise, neither their adoption nor their implementation may be categorised, in terms of their principle or generally, as an ‘abuse of a dominant position&#8216;. The same holds true for sanctions introduced as an adjunct to those rules, since such sanctions are legitimate, in terms of their principle, as a means of guaranteeing the effectiveness of those rules»</em> [N 145-146].</p>
<p>However, on the basis of the assumption of a dominant position, the ECJ essentially held that the relevant rules of sports federations on prior approval of and access to competitions would be abusive if there were no framework providing for substantive criteria and detailed procedural rules capable of ensuring that the rules on prior approval of competitions are transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate. The ECJ referred the case back to the commercial court in Madrid, holding that it will be for the referring court to categorize the rules at issue in the main proceedings in the light of Article 102 TFEU, after carrying out the additional verifications it may deem necessary.</p>
<p>The ECJ reached this conclusion on the basis that without such a framework, the current rules on prior approval of and access to competitions could create a conflict of interest. According to the ECJ&#8217;s analysis, equal opportunities for competitors must be maintained. In the ECJ&#8217;s view, the fact that an undertaking engaged in a particular economic activity (sc. Organizing competitions) has the power (<em>de jure </em>or<em> de facto</em>) both to decide which other undertakings may compete in that activity and to determine the conditions under which they may do so creates a conflict of interest which may harm competition. According to the ECJ, it is not per se unlawful to apply rules on access to competition, but it is required that the criteria are transparent, objective and non-discriminatory. The ECJ provides specific guidance on how these criteria should be assessed. First, they must be published in advance in an accessible form. Second, they must be non-discriminatory, and to that end, the rules must set comparable conditions for the sports federations that establish them as well as potential third-party competitors and must not make it impossible or excessively difficult for third-party competitors to comply with them. Finally, the sanctions introduced to enforce these rules must not be discretionary, i.e. they must be based on objective and non-discriminatory criteria and be subject to procedures that ensure that they are proportionate to the infringement in each individual case.</p>
<h4>1.4 Analysis Under Article 101 TFEU</h4>
<p>Next, the ECJ analyzed rules on prior approval of and access to competitions under article 101 TFEU. The ECJ held that, although the rules on the prior approval of and access to competitions may include the pursuit of legitimate objectives, such as e.g. ensuring compliance with the principles, values and rules of the game which underpin professional sport, these rules confer on the sports federations the power to authorize, control and determine the conditions of access to the relevant market for any potentially competing undertaking. They thus also confer on the sports federations the power to determine both the degree of competition which may exist on that market and the conditions under which that potential competition may be exercised.</p>
<p>According to the ECJ, as regards the adoption or implementation of rules for the prior approval of and access to competitions by associations which are responsible for football at world and European level and which at the same time carry out various economic activities related to the organization of competitions, the key question is whether there is a framework containing substantive criteria and detailed procedural rules capable of ensuring that they are transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate. In the absence of such a framework, the adoption and implementation of such rules by associations constituted a decision by an association of undertakings which has as its object the prevention of competition. Therefore, in the absence of such a framework, the prior approval rules would be within the scope of Article 101(1) TFEU, without it being necessary to examine the actual or potential effects of the rules.</p>
<p>This conclusion itself is not surprising, as the aim of these rules is obviously to prevent unauthorized competition. The key question, however, is whether the rules can be justified.</p>
<h4>1.5 Potential Justification</h4>
<p>The ECJ hence examined whether the rules on prior approval, participation and sanctions at issue may either benefit from an exemption or be considered justified.</p>
<p>With regard to Article 101 TFEU, the ECJ first examined whether the rules can be justified. The Court first addressed the scope of the so-called <em>Wouters</em> or <em>Meca-Medina</em> exemption. Certain specific types of conducts, such as ethical rules or principles adopted by an association, may fall outside the scope of the prohibition in Article 101(1) TFEU if they can be justified, even in cases when they have an inherent restrictive effect on competition. However, for this to be the case, they must be justified by the aim of pursuing legitimate objectives in the public interest, which may not per se be anti-competitive in nature, and the specific means used to pursue those objectives must be necessary and proportionate to that aim (cf. the ECJ&#8217;s prior case law in this regard, specifically <em>Wouters and Others</em>, C‑309/99 and <em>Meca-Medina and Majcen v Commission</em>, C‑519/04 P).</p>
<p>The ECJ concluded that its previous case-law on justification, and specifically the justifications set forth in the <em>Wouters / Meca-Medina</em> decisions, cannot be applied in situations involving conduct that by its nature infringes Article 102 TFEU, as well as in situations in which such conduct reveals a sufficient degree of harm to justify a finding that has as its ‘object’ the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the meaning of Article 101 TFEU.</p>
<p>The ECJ then examined whether an exemption could apply. According to Article 101(3) TFEU, ain a given case is subject to four cumulative conditions: i) it must be demonstrated with a sufficient degree of probability that the agreement allows efficiency gains, ii) it must be demonstrated, with the same degree of probability, that a fair share of the profit resulting from these efficiency gains is reserved for the users; iii) the agreement in question must not impose on the participating undertakings restrictions which are not indispensable to the attainment of such efficiency gains; and iv) the agreement must not give the participating undertakings the opportunity to eliminate effective competition for a substantial part of the products or services concerned.</p>
<p>In the ESL case, the ECJ referred the case back to the commercial court in Madrid to make these determinations on the basis of evidence to be submitted by the parties. However, the ECJ did provide some guidance. According to the ECJ, as regards the fourth condition of an exemption (maintenance of sufficient competition), the commercial court in Madrid must take into account whether the sports federations current rules on prior authorization, participation and sanctions are embedded into a framework of substantive criteria as well as detailed procedural rules capable of ensuring that the rules and sanctions are transparent, objective, precise and non-discriminatory.</p>
<p>With regard to a potential justification under Article 102 TFEU, the ECJ recalled that justification is possible if the undertaking concerned demonstrates either that its conduct was objectively justified by circumstances external to the undertaking and proportionate to that justification, or that its conduct is counterbalanced or outweighed by efficiency gains which must also benefit consumers.</p>
<p>Regarding those rules of UEFA and FIFA which aim to reserve the organization of any competitions to themselves, the ECJ itself found no objective justification and instructed the commercial court in Madrid to examine a possible justification on the grounds of efficiency.</p>
<h3>2. Implications</h3>
<p>While at first glance it may seem that the ESLC has scored a decisive goal, the ECJ&#8217;s judgment may in fact be of limited use to the ESLC. However, both judgements regarding ESCL and ISU may have wide implications for sports and their governing bodies more generally, and not just in the arenas of football and ice skating. It remains to be seen how the ECJ&#8217;s decisions will affect the European Super League project, given that most clubs no longer support the project and the fact that the Madrid court will now have to rule on the project itself. The ECJ emphasized that it did not rule on the compatibility of the European Super League project with the TFEU, and referred this question back to the commercial court in Madrid.</p>
<p>Both the ESL and the ISU decisions clarify that sports governing bodies must establish transparent, objective, non-discriminatory rules when they require prior approval of and access to competitions and ensure proportionality in case of sanctions. Moreover, the ECJ provided clarity on the applicability of European competition law to sport: it does apply and must be respected. In this regard, the ECJ sets some guardrails and found that certain current rules of sports governing bodies may potentially fail to comply with EU competition law, although this analysis may change if the Madrid court finds that the disputed rules are justified. The ECJ also provided important guidance that may help sports governing bodies to assess how to adapt their rules to ensure continued compliance with EU competition law in the future.</p>


1000x1000_Web

Landmark ECJ Judgments Regarding Competition Law in Sports

Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit

Kapitalmarkt

Wettbewerb

Compliance

Gesellschaftsrecht / M&A

Datenschutz

Arbeitsrecht und Vergütung für Führungskräfte

Finanzmarktrecht

Finanzierungen und Anlageprodukte

Healthcare / Life Sciences

Versicherungen

Untersuchungen

IP / IT

Prozesse

Private Clients

Immobilien

Regulierung

Restrukturierungen / Insolvenz

Steuern

Legal500_640x140

Homburger News

20250326 - Legal 500 Rankings 2025

The Legal 500 Rankings 2025: Homburger top ranked

<p>The Legal 500 hat Homburger in 13 Kategorien als Tier 1-Kanzlei ausgezeichnet und in weiteren 9 Kategorien aufgeführt: Banking and Finance; Capital Markets; Commercial, Corporate and M&amp;A; Competition; Construction; Data Privacy and Data Protection; Dispute Resolution: Arbitration; Dispute Resolution: Litigation; Employment; Fintech; Healthcare and Life Sciences; Insolvency and Corporate Recovery; Insurance; Intellectual Property; Private Client; Public Law; Real Estate; Regulatory, Compliance and Investigations; Sports Law; Tax; TMT und Transport.</p>
<p>Innerhalb der gerankten Kategorien konnten 52 unserer Anwältinnen und Anwälte Platzierungen erreichen: <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/alexander-wherlock" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alexander Wherlock</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/allegra-arnold" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Allegra Arnold</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/andreas-burger" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Andreas Burger</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/andreas-muller" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Andreas Müller</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/andri-hess" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Andri Hess</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/angelika-murer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Angelika Murer</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/anna-peter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Anna Peter</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/balz-gross" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Balz Gross</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/benedikt-maurenbrecher" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Benedikt Maurenbrecher</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/benjamin-leisinger" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Benjamin Leisinger</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/claudia-suter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Claudia Suter</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/claudio-bazzani" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Claudio Bazzani</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/daniel-daeniker" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daniel Daeniker</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/daniel-haeberli" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daniel Haeberli</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/daniel-hasler" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daniel Hasler</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/daniel-hausermann" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daniel Häusermann</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/david-oser" target="_blank" rel="noopener">David Oser</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/david-thomann" target="_blank" rel="noopener">David Thomann</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/dieter-gericke" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dieter Gericke</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/dieter-grunblatt" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dieter Grünblatt</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/dilber-devitre" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dilber Devitre</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/fabrice-eckert" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fabrice Eckert</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/felix-dasser" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Felix Dasser</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/flavio-romerio" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Flavio Romerio</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/frank-gerhard" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Frank Gerhard</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/franz-hoffet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Franz Hoffet</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/gabrielle-nater-bass" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gabrielle Nater-Bass</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/georg-rauber" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Georg Rauber</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/gregor-buhler" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gregor Bühler</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/hansjurg-appenzeller" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hansjürg Appenzeller</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/jeremy-reichlin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jeremy Reichlin</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/julian-schwaller" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Julian Schwaller</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/jurg-frick" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jürg Frick</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/kirsten-wesiak-schmidt" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Kirsten Wesiak-Schmidt</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/laetitia-fracheboud" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Laetitia Fracheboud</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/luca-dal-molin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Luca Dal Molin</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/marcel-dietrich" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Marcel Dietrich</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/mariella-orelli" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Mariella Orelli</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/miguel-sogo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Miguel Sogo</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/philippe-baumann" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Philippe Baumann</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/rene-bosch" target="_blank" rel="noopener">René Bösch</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/reto-heuberger" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reto Heuberger</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/richard-stauber" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Richard Stäuber</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/roman-baechler" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Roman Baechler</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefan-bindschedler" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefan Bindschedler</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefan-blunschi" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefan Blunschi</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefan-gaumann" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefan Gäumann</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefan-kramer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefan Kramer</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefan-oesterhelt" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefan Oesterhelt</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/stefanie-pfisterer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stefanie Pfisterer</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/tanja-niederer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tanja Niederer</a>, <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/team/tobias-kaufmann" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tobias Kaufmann</a>.</p>
<p>The Legal 500 analysiert als Teil von Legalease, einem Anbieter von Informationen zum Rechtsmarkt, Anwaltskanzleien weltweit und veröffentlicht jährliche Rankings basierend auf einer umfangreichen Recherche.</p>


Homburger for Biotronik

20250311_Biotronik

Homburger advises BIOTRONIK on sale of VI Business to Teleflex

<p>On February 27, 2025, BIOTRONIK Group announced that it has entered into an agreement to divest its Vascular Intervention (VI) business division to Teleflex Incorporated. The transaction is subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions and is expected to close before the end of the third quarter of 2025.</p>
<p>BIOTRONIK is a Berlin-based global leader in medical technology and a pioneer in cardiovascular, endovascular, and neuromodulation solutions. Teleflex (NYSE: TFX) is a Pennsylvania-based leading global provider of medical technologies with a diverse portfolio, including solutions in the fields of vascular and interventional access, surgical, anesthesia, cardiac care, urology, emergency medicine and respiratory care.</p>
<p>Homburger acts as Swiss transaction counsel to BIOTRONIK. The team includes Andreas Müller, Anna Peter, Jasmin Künzle, Romain Hondius, Oliver Kneubühl and Cédric Berger (all Corporate / M&amp;A), Richard Stäuber and Angelika Murer (both Regulatory), Luca Dal Molin and Philippe Baumann (both IP / IT), Stefan Gäumann (Real Estate), Jeremy Reichlin and Angela Casey (both Employment and Executive Compensation), as well as Reto Heuberger and Philippe Weber (both Tax).</p>


<p>Am 21. Juni 2023 erhielt Homburger bei den Managing IP Awards 2023 EMEA den «European Cross-border Patent Litigation Team of the Year»-Award verliehen für ihre Arbeit in Bezug auf Novartis (Fingolimod-Patent). Unser Patentteam wurde von Partner Andri Hess geleitet und umfasste Associate Angelika Murer.</p>


Homburger mit Managing IP Award für «European Cross-border Patent Litigation Team of the Year» ausgezeichnet

<p>Angelika Murer ist berechtigt, vor allen Schweizer Gerichten aufzutreten und Klienten vor dem Einheitlichen Patentgericht (UPC) zu vertreten.</p>


Angelika
Murer

The Legal 500 Rankings 2025: Homburger top ranked

Homburger advises BIOTRONIK on sale of VI Business to Teleflex

Homburger mit Managing IP Award für «European Cross-border Patent Litigation Team of the Year» ausgezeichnet

Raising the bar à la Suisse

Landmark ECJ Judgments Regarding Competition Law in Sports

Blocking Patents in European Competition Law

Regulatory data protection on marketing authorisation extensions – the second medical use problem reloaded

Wettbewerbsrecht mit europarechtlichen Bezügen und Immaterialgüterrecht

Join the Team

Angelika Murer

Karriere

Sprachen

Zulassung

Teams

AngelikaMurer

The Legal 500 Rankings 2025: Homburger top ranked

Homburger advises BIOTRONIK on sale of VI Business to Teleflex

Homburger mit Managing IP Award für «European Cross-border Patent Litigation Team of the Year» ausgezeichnet

Raising the bar à la Suisse

Landmark ECJ Judgments Regarding Competition Law in Sports

Blocking Patents in European Competition Law

Regulatory data protection on marketing authorisation extensions – the second medical use problem reloaded

Wettbewerbsrecht mit europarechtlichen Bezügen und Immaterialgüterrecht

Join the Team

Angelika Murer

Karriere

Sprachen

Zulassung

Teams

Angelika
Murer