라이선스__글266건

  1. 2019.05.16 특허발명 실시허여, 기술이전, 라이센스 계약서에서 Licensee의 특허유효성 도전 제한, 부쟁의무 계약조항의 효력, 쟁점, 영문 계약조항 샘플
  2. 2019.05.15 Licensor – 벤처회사, 발명자 대학교수, 특허권자 대학, 연구소 vs 제약회사 - Licensee 사이 바이오신약 후보물질 특허기술 라이선스 계약서에서 라이센시의 임상시험 수행 등 개발의무 관련 간략..
  3. 2019.05.15 대학소유 특허의 기술이전, 라이선스 계약에서 재실시허용 조건 위반 사례 - 특허권자 Licensor 미국대학 vs Licensee 벤처회사 + Sub-licensee 대기업 AbbVie : 라이선스 계약분쟁 중 라이센시 특허무효 ..
  4. 2019.05.15 대학교수 발명특허의 기술이전, 라이선스 계약서에서 sublicense 조항, 후속 개량발명의 특허출원 및 등록, 공동발명, Sublicense 및 Royalty 등 Collaboration 분쟁 사례 미국 판결
  5. 2019.05.15 Licensor - 대학교수, 대학, 연구소 및 벤처회사 vs 제약회사 Licensee 사이의 바이오신약 후보물질 특허기술 라이선스 계약서에 포함된 sublicense 관련 계약조항 샘플
  6. 2019.05.15 국제계약서에 통상 들어가는 일반조항 Affiliate 정의조항 사례 – 기술이전, 라이선스 계약서 샘플
  7. 2019.05.14 특허권 전용실시권 허여계약에 특허발명실시 전 특허권자의 승낙 요건 특약 존재 – 전용실시권 등록 후 실시권자의 특약위반 시 계약위반책임과 별개로 특허권침해책임 불인정 - 독립적 판..
  8. 2019.05.14 기술이전, 라이선스 계약서에서 License 대상 IP 및 특허 정의조항, 적용범위, 계약체결 후 발명 출원 및 특허 쟁점, 제3자의 이의신청 또는 침해소송대응 관련 계약서 샘플
  9. 2019.05.13 제약분야 기술이전 및 독점라이선스 계약서 중에서 진술보증 조항 REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND COVEANTS – 권리진술 및 독점권 보장의무 등 상세한 내용을 매우 구체적으로 기재하는 방식의 계약조..
  10. 2019.05.13 진술보증 조항 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 관련 분쟁 - M&A 계약서 중 진술 및 보증조항 위반 및 손해배상책임 범위
  11. 2019.05.13 벤처기업의 인수, 합병 시 기술이전 및 라이선스, 공동연구개발계약상 쟁점 - License, Collaboration Agreement 당사자의 M&A 등 경영권 변경사유, change of control 발생 상황에 대비한 계약조항
  12. 2019.05.13 라이선스 계약서에 중재(arbitration) 합의조항 포함 s/w License 계약분쟁 및 영업비밀침해 분쟁 + 소송관할 합의조항 포함 NDA 계약분쟁 등이 결합된 소송의 법원의 재판관할 판단 – 미국법원 소송..
  13. 2019.05.13 바이오 벤처회사와 제약회사 사이 유전자 치료제 신약공동개발 및 라이선스 계약서에서 분쟁해결 방안 중재조항의 적용범위 판단: 서울 서울중앙지방법원 2018. 5. 18. 선고 2017가합570338 판결
  14. 2019.05.10 국제계약서 중에서 기술이전 및 독점라이선스 계약서 중 기간, 계약위반 등으로 인한 계약종료, 계약종료 후 처리 등 TERM AND TERMINATION 조항 샘플
  15. 2019.05.10 제약회사의 신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중 독점 LICENSE 부여 및 독점권 보장 계약조항 샘플
  16. 2019.05.10 신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 국제계약서 중에서 면책조항 INDEMNIFICATION, INSURANCE, LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 계약조항 샘플
  17. 2019.05.10 제약회사 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중에서 진술 및 보증조항 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 계약조항 샘플
  18. 2019.05.10 국제계약서 중 비밀보호계약, 비밀유지약정, NDA, CDA 조항 – 비밀정보 범위, 적용 배제대상, 비밀유지 의무, 위반시 조치 등 계약조항 샘플
  19. 2019.05.10 국제계약서에 통상 들어가는 일반조항 GENERAL PROVISIONS 사례 – 제약회사 신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중 일반조항 샘플
  20. 2019.05.10 국제계약분쟁 해결방안 ADR, 공식 중재기관의 Arbitration 외 사적 조정방안 - The International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR) 선택 계약조항 소개
  21. 2019.04.16 [의료기기쟁점] 의료기기 판매 및 영업 활동 관련 공정거래법 위반 여부
  22. 2019.04.13 [라이센스쟁점] Licensee 실시권자가 Licensor 특허권자를 상대로 License 대상 특허권에 대한 무효심판청구 가능: 대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 2017후2819 전원합의체 판결
  23. 2019.04.13 [특허분쟁] Licensee 실시권자가 Licensor 특허권자를 상대로 License 대상 특허권에 대한 무효심판청구 가능: 대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 2017후2819 전원합의체 판결
  24. 2019.04.13 [특허라이센스분쟁] 특허권자 Licensor 상대로 실시권자 Licensee가 대상특허에 대한 무효심판청구 가능 + 그 결과 특허무효의 경우 계약상 실시료 Royalty 지급의무 범위 및 소멸시기: 대법원 2019. 2...
  25. 2019.04.12 [기술이전계약] 신약 물질특허 기술이전 Exclusive License 계약서 중 Development 조항 1
  26. 2019.04.12 [기술이전계약] 특허라이선스 분쟁 - License 계약의 대상특허의 범위 - 계약체결 이후 등록된 특허 중에서 License 대상특허로 볼 수 있는 등록특허의 범위: 미국 Endo Pharm Opana® ER 특허분쟁 판결
  27. 2019.04.12 [기술이전계약] 신약물질 기술이전 License 계약서 중 특허관련 계약조항 사례
  28. 2019.04.12 [기술이전계약] 특허권자 Licensor 미국대학 vs Licensee 벤처회사 + Sub-licensee 대기업 AbbVie : 라이선스 계약분쟁 중 라이센시 특허무효 항변 불허 및 부쟁조항 효력인정 미국법원 판결
  29. 2019.03.20 [업무상배임죄쟁점] 영업비밀 침해분쟁에서 회사자료를 무단 유출한 직원의 업무상 배임죄 책임 여부 – 배임의 고의 판단
  30. 2019.03.20 [영업비밀분쟁] 무단 자료유출 행위에 대한 업무상배임 책임과 유출자료의 조건

 

 

특허발명의 실시허략, 기술이전 라이선스를 체결하면서 계약서에서 Licensee는 대상특허의 무효도전(patent challenge)을 할 수 없다는 명시적 조항을 둔 경우 Licensee가 무효주장을 할 수 있는지 문제됩니다. Licensee에게 대상 특허의 유효성에 대해 다투지 않을 의무를 계약으로 강제할 수 있는지 여부가 쟁점입니다.

 

원칙적으로 licensee 입장에서 대상특허의 무효도전을 하는 것은 허용됩니다. 미국연방대법원 Lear v. Adkins (1969) 판결에서 “a licensee cannot be estopped from challenging the validity of a patent merely because it benefitted from the license agreement.”라고 명시적으로 라이센시의 특허도전을 허용하였습니다.

 

그러나, 라이선스 계약위반으로 이미 성립된 계약위반책임을 회피하기 위해 사후적으로 제기하는 특허무효주장은 허용되지 않는다는 것이 미국법원 판결입니다.  Studiengesellshaft Kohle v. Shell Oil (CAFC 1997) 판결: Lear does not apply where a licensee seeks to avoid contractual obligations already owed at the time of the suit. It "must prevent the injustice of allowing a licensee to exploit the protection of the contract and patent rights and then later to abandon conveniently its obligations under those same rights."

 

앞서 소개한 사안 - Licensee Neurocrine의 계약위반책임 항변으로 계약대상특허의 무효 주장을 배척한 판결 

 

미국법원은 sublicense 허용조건으로 licensor의 사전동의를 받도록 한 계약조항을 위반한 행위에 대한 손해배상을 구하는 범위내에서 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용되지 않는다고 판결하였습니다.

 

다만, 사안을 구별하여, 특허권자가 특허기술 사용에 대한 장래 royalty를 청구하는 경우는 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용될 수 있다는 취지의 판결입니다. 이 부분에 대한 라이선스 계약위반 사항은 없기 때문입니다.

 

라이선스 계약을 준수하면서 대상특허 무효도전 허용 – MedImmune 판결

 

미연방대법원은 MedImmune 판결에서 Licensee는 계약상 로열티를 계속 지불하면서도 특허무효 확인 소송을 제기할 수 있다고 판결하였습니다. 라이센스 계약에 위배하여 로열티의 지급을 중지하는 경우, 특허권자로부터 제소당하여 침해에 대한 고의가 인정되면 3배까지 배상금을 지불하여야 할 위험이 있으므로 해당 특허의 무효를 확신하여도 마지못해 로열티를 지불하게 된다면실제의 분쟁이 발생한 것이라고 볼 수 있다고 보았습니다.

 

우리나라 공정위 특허라이선스 계약 관련 심사지침 - ‘무효인 특허의 존속 등을 위하여 부당하게 실시권자가 관련 특허의 효력을 다투는 것을 금지하는 행위는 공정거래법 위반 소지 있음, 해당 계약조항의 효력 불인정 소지 있음, 해당 사안에 대한 판결 없음

 

대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 20172819 전원합의체 판결: 실시권자 Licensee의 특허권자 Licensor 상대로 대상특허에 대한 무효심판청구 가능 - 특허무효의 경우 계약상 실시료 Royalty 지급의무 범위 소멸:

 

특허권의 실시권자에게는 실시료 지급이나 실시 범위 등 여러 제한 사항이 부가되는 것이 일반적이므로, 실시권자는 무효심판을 통해 특허에 대한 무효심결을 받음으로써 이러한 제약에서 벗어날 수 있다.

 

그리고 특허에 무효사유가 존재하더라도 그에 대한 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 그 특허권은 유효하게 존속하고 함부로 그 존재를 부정할 수 없으며, 무효심판을 청구하더라도 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 상당한 시간과 비용이 소요된다.

 

이러한 이유로 특허권에 대한 실시권을 설정받지 않고 실시하고 싶은 사람이라도 우선 특허권자로부터 실시권을 설정받아 특허발명을 실시하고 그 무효 여부에 대한 다툼을 추후로 미루어 둘 수 있으므로, 실시권을 설정받았다는 이유로 특허의 무효 여부를 다투지 않겠다는 의사를 표시하였다고 단정할 수도 없다.”

 

Licensor 이익을 위한 부쟁조항 예문 Example

라이센시의 특별한 상황에서는 인정한 미연방대법원 MedImmune 판결이 나온 지 벌써 10년이 지났습니다. 현재에도 Licensee의 부쟁의무 조항에 대해 정답을 명확하게 말할 수 없을 정도로 매우 어려운 쟁점사항(issue)입니다. 최근 본 미국 블로그 내용 중에서 라이선스 실무자에게 참고자료로 도움될 것 같은 계약문구 examples을 간략하게 인용합니다.

 

Examples of Patent Challenge Definition Clause

Example 1: if licensee or its affiliate under a license commences an action in which it challenges the validity, enforceability or scope of any of the patent rights under, then [a remedy will be triggered, such as termination of the license, doubling of the royalty rate, or some other event].

 

Example 2: in the event any licensee (or sublicensee or any entity or person acting on its behalf) initiates any proceeding or otherwise asserts any claim challenging the validity or enforceability of any licensed patent right in any court, administrative agency or other forum, then [a remedy will be triggered].

 

Example 3: any legal or administrative challenge to the validity, patentability, enforceability and/or non-infringement of any of the licensed patent or otherwise opposing the licensed patent.

 

Examples of Licensor’s Remedies

-      Right to Terminate the License

-      Increase in Royalty Rates

-      Liquidated Damages

-      Reimbursement of Legal Fees

 

KASAN_특허발명 실시허여, 기술이전, 라이센스 계약서에서 Licensee의 특허유효성 도전 제한, 부쟁의무 계약조항의 효력, 쟁점, 영문 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 16. 08:49
:

 

 

1.3 “Commercially Reasonable Efforts” shall mean the efforts, expertise and resources normally used by a Party to develop, use, Manufacture and commercialize a product owned by it or to which it has rights, which is of similar market potential at a similar stage in its development or product life, taking into account issues of safety and efficacy, product profile, difficulty in developing the product, competitiveness of the marketplace for the product, the proprietary position of the product, the regulatory structure involved, the availability and level of reimbursement for such treatment by Third Party payors or health insurance plans, the potential total profitability of the applicable product(s) marketed or to be marketed and other relevant factors affecting the cost, risk and timing of Development and the total potential reward to be obtained if a product is commercialized.

 

7.1 Research and Development Efforts. The Licensee Kite shall use its Commercially Reasonable Efforts to conduct such research, development and preclinical and human clinical trials as are necessary to obtain regulatory approval to manufacture and market Licensed Products, and shall use good faith efforts to obtain regulatory approval to market, and following approval to commence marketing and market each such Licensed Product in such countries as Kite determines are commercially feasible. Kite, shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, for the development of Licensed Products in the Field. Kite, shall be responsible for: clinical trials with respect to the Licensed Products and filing required regulatory submissions and dealings with Regulatory Authorities with respect to Licensed Products. Kite shall also be responsible for reporting to the appropriate regulatory authorities adverse events related to Licensed Products as required by applicable law. Kite, shall also be responsible for communications with the FDA regarding such filings and Licensed Products; provided that Cabaret shall be consulted regarding any discussions or meetings with the FDA regarding Licensed Products, and following each meeting between the FDA and Kite regarding a Licensed Product, Kite shall provide Cabaret with a written summary of such meeting. Kite undertakes to use its Commercially Reasonable Efforts to ensure that the Licensed Products marketed by it will, and it shall, in carrying out its obligations hereunder, comply with all legal requirements. Kite shall notify Cabaret within [*] after Kite becomes aware of the First Commercial Sale of a Licensed Product in each country. Kite shall have the right to perform all such obligations on its own behalf, or through an Affiliate, Sublicensee or contractor (which shall constitute performance by Kite hereunder).

 

7.2 Records. The Licensee Kite shall maintain records, in sufficient detail and in good scientific manner, which shall reflect all work done and results achieved in the performance of its research and development regarding the Licensed Products.

 

7.3 Reports. Within [*] following the end of each June and December during the term of this Agreement, the Licensee Kite shall prepare and deliver to the Licensor Cabaret a written summary report which shall describe (a) the research performed to date employing the Licensed IP Rights, (b) the progress of the development, and testing of Licensed Products in clinical trials, and (c) the status of obtaining regulatory approvals to market and its commercialization activities for Licensed Products. Kite promptly shall notify Cabaret upon the initiation of any formal investigation, review or inquiry of Kite by regulatory authorities or governmental authorities concerning (i) non-clinical or clinical research relating to a Licensed Product; or (ii) the distribution, promotion or sale of a Licensed Product.

 

KASAN_Licensor – 벤처회사, 발명자 대학교수, 특허권자 대학, 연구소 vs 제약회사 - Licensee 사이 바이오신약 후보물질 특허기술 라이선스 계약서에서 라이센시의 임상시험 수행 등 개발의무 관.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 15. 17:30
:

 

 

1. 사안의 개요

 

Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH)은 전립선암, 자궁암, 유방암을 포함하여 많은 내분비계 질환과 관련된 것으로 알려져 있습니다. NY 소재 Mt. Sinai 의과대학 Dr. Sealfon 교수는 1998년경 GnRH 관련 질병치료제 개발의 기본 tool에 해당하는 연구개발성과에 대한 2건의 특허를 등록하고, 1999. 8. 27. San Diego 소재 벤처기업 Neurocrine Biosciences nonexclusive license를 허여하는 계약을 체결하였고, Neurocrine10여년간의 연구개발 끝에 2010년경 대기업 Abbott(현재 AbbVie)와 신약연구개발 성과(신약후보 물질 Elagolix )에 대한 exclusive license 계약을 체결하였습니다.

 

최초 라이선스 계약서 중 sublicense 허용조항은 다음과 같습니다. – The Licensee Neurocrine may "grant sublicenses under the License only with the prior written consent" of the Licensor Mt. Sinai.

 

Neurocrine에서 AbbVie와 라이선스 계약을 체결하면서 Mt. Sinai 의과대학의 사전동의를 받지 않았습니다. 그것이 라이선스 계약위반에 해당하는지, 손해배상책임 여부가 문제됩니다.

 

한편, Elagolix는 현재 FDA 허가심사 중인데, Mt. Sinai 의과대학에서 향후 신약에 대한 Royalty를 받을 수 있는지 등이 중대한 문제입니다.

 

2. 특허라이선스와 Licensee의 특허무효 부쟁의무   

 

원칙적으로 licensee 입장에서 대상특허의 무효항변을 제기하는 것은 허용됩니다. 미국연방대법원 Lear v. Adkins (1969) 판결: a licensee cannot be estopped from challenging the validity of a patent merely because it benefitted from the license agreement.

 

그러나, 라이선스 계약위반으로 이미 성립된 책임을 회피하기 위해 사후적으로 제기하는 특허무효주장은 허용되지 않는다는 것이 미국법원 판결입니다. Studiengesellshaft Kohle v. Shell Oil (CAFC 1997) 판결: Lear does not apply where a licensee seeks to avoid contractual obligations already owed at the time of the suit. It "must prevent the injustice of allowing a licensee to exploit the protection of the contract and patent rights and then later to abandon conveniently its obligations under those same rights."

 

3. 미국법원의 Licensee Neurocrine의 대상특허 무효 항변 배척 판결 

 

미국법원은 sublicense 허용조건으로 licensor의 사전동의를 받도록 한 계약조항을 위반한 행위에 대한 손해배상을 구하는 범위내에서 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용되지 않는다고 판결하였습니다.

 

다만, 사안을 구별하여, 특허권자가 특허기술 사용에 대한 장래 royalty를 청구하는 경우는 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용될 수 있다는 취지의 판결입니다. 이 부분에 대한 라이선스 계약위반 사항은 없기 때문입니다.

 

참고로 licensee특허비침해 주장도 하였지만, 미국법원은 위 사안에서 라이선스 계약위반에 대한 항변으로 허용될 수 없다고 명확하게 판결하였습니다.

 

대학의 특허발명에 출발하여 벤처기업에서 10여년간 연구개발한 성과를 다시 대규모 제약회사에 라이선스하여 최종적으로 신약허가신청까지 성공한 사례입니다. 여기서 최초 대학과 체결한 라이선스 계약에 관한 분쟁으로 라이선스 실무자들에게 흥미로운 사건입니다.

 

중도 합의로 종결되어 최종 손해배상금액까지 결정한 최종 판결이 나오지 않을 가능성이 높지만 비록 중간판결일지라도 모니터링해볼 흥미로운 사례라고 생각합니다.

 

미국법원 사건 정보 Case: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai v. Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc., No. 15 Civ. 9414, S.D.N.Y.

 

KASAN_대학소유 특허의 기술이전, 라이선스 계약에서 재실시허용 조건 위반 사례 - 특허권자 Licensor 미국대학 vs Licensee 벤처회사 Sub-licensee 대기업 AbbVie 라이선스 계약분쟁 중 라이센시 특허.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 15. 16:30
:

 

 

1. 머리말

 

대학기술을 license하여 산학공동협력연구 Research Collaboration Agreement를 체결하는 경우 후속 연구개발성과에 대한 권리귀속, 그 기술을 대기업 등 제3자에게 다시 license하거나 이전하는 등 사업화하여 수익을 창출할 수 있는 sublicense 단계에서의 수익배분 문제는 핵심쟁점 중 하나입니다.

 

최대한 파이를 키워야만 서로 나누어 가질 조각도 커진다는 기본전제는 분명합니다. 먼저 파이를 키우는 후속 연구개발과 sublicense는 서로 적극적으로 지원해야 합니다. 그 다음 파이조각 나누기는 쉽지 않습니다. 왜냐하면, 후속 연구개발성과에 대한 권리관계 판단이 쉽지 않기 때문입니다. 통상 sublicense는 원천기술보다 후속 연구개발성과를 본 후 원천기술에 그것을 포함하여 대상으로 하거나 원천기술보다 후속 연구개발성과를 주된 대상기술로 하기 때문입니다. 후속연구개발에 대한 기여도가 똑같지 않기 때문에 소유권 또는 지분권 등에 관한 분쟁 가능성이 높습니다.

 

특히 대학교수가 licensee 기업으로부터 위탁연구용역을 수주하는 경우도 많기 때문에 위탁연구 관련 발명의 발명자에 해당하는지 아니면 단순 외주 용역에 불과한지, 특히 소속대학은 직무발명 법리에 근거한 지분권이 있는지 등등 복잡한 문제가 생깁니다. 아래에서 미국대학 중 기술이전 실적이 많고 또 소송 등 권리행사에 적극적인 Wisconsin 대학의 분쟁사례 판결을 참고로 소개합니다.

 

2. 기술이전 및 산학협력연구

 

. 대학기술 라이선스 및 산학협동연구

 

1999 Wisconsin 대학교수는 SCD 저해화합물의 콜레스테롤 저하 효능을 발견하였고, Wisconsin 대학산학협력단에서 2000년 연구결과에 대한 provisional patent application을 출원하였습니다. 그 후 캐나다 제약회사 Xenon에서 특허출원기술을 포함한 exclusive license agreement Wisconsin 대학교수를 포함한 연구진과 콜레스테롤 저하 효능의 신약개발에 관한 공동연구개발계약을 체결하고, 공동연구개발을 진행하여 다수 신물질의 효과를 확인하였습니다. Xenon사는 그 다음 해 2001 provisional patent application에 대한 우선권을 주장하면서 추가 연구성과를 포함하여 대학과 공동 특허출원을 하였습니다.

 

. 후속 연구개발성과에 대한 회사의 단독 특허출원

 

한편, Xenon은 계속하여 license 대상 물질을 넘어서 그 범위를 확대하여 수천개의 화합물의 약효를 확인하는 추가 연구개발 프로젝트를 추진하였고, 이때 위스콘신 대학이 아닌 제3의 외부 전문 연구기관과 위탁연구용역을 진행하였습니다.

 

그 결과 효능이 뛰어난 PPA 군 화합물 20여개를 선택한 후, 다시 Wisconsin 대학의 교수에게 보내 효능을 재확인하는 위탁연구용역을 하였습니다. 그 최종 결과물을 갖고 Xenon사 단독으로 PPA군 화합물에 대한 후속 특허출원을 하였습니다.

 

. Norvatis sublicense 성사 및 분쟁발생  

 

Xenon사는 후속으로 단독 출원했던 신약후보물질 PPA 관련 기술에 대해, 대형 제약회사 Novartis와 특허출원 후 3,4년이 지나 기술이전 및 license하는 계약을 체결하였습니다.

 

Wisconsin 대학은 Xenon의 후속 연구성과물에 대한 단독 특허출원 기술내용, PPA 기술내용도 Wisconsin 대학과 공동 출원한 선행 특허출원의 청구범위에 속하고, 대학과 체결한 exclusive license 적용대상이므로 계약상 sublicense에 해당하고, 따라서 약정한 sublicense fee를 대학에 지불해야 한다고 주장합니다.

 

반면, licensee Xenon사에서는 후속 연구성과 PPA 관련 기술내용은 대학과 무관하게 독자적인 연구개발의 성과물로서 단독소유라고 주장하였습니다.

 

또한, 설령 그 기술내용이 선출원 특허의 청구범위에 속한다고 하더라도 미국법상 공동 출원인 Xenon사는 타 공유자의 동의 없이 자유롭게 license 하는 등 실시할 권리가 있다고 주장합니다. , 특허공유자는 타 공유자에게 수익 배분의 부담 없이 자유롭게 공유 특허발명을 양도 또는 라이선스를 할 수 있기 때문에 Norvatis로부터 받은 로열티 수입 중 일부를 위스콘신 대학에 배분해 주어야 할 의무는 없다고 주장합니다.

 

3. 미국법원 판결

 

Xenon사의 방어논리 중 핵심포인트는 미국특허법상 공동출원인, 특허공유자의 특허기술전체에 대한 자유로운 실시권에 기초한 것입니다. 미국법원은 특허법상 공유자의 권리의무관계는 당사자 사이의 계약으로 달리 정할 수 있고, 그 경우 당사자 사이 계약내용이 이 우선 적용된다는 기본원칙을 명확하게 밝혔습니다.

 

Xenon사는 Wisconsin 대학 산학협력단과 체결한 계약서에서 sublicense를 허용하고 그 경우 대학에 일정한 sublicense fee를 지불하기로 약정하였고, 그와 같은 계약은 공동출원인, 공유특허권자 사이에서도 유효한데, Xenon사에서 그와 같은 계약을 위반했다고 판결하였습니다.

 

결국 Xenon사는 exclusive license agreement에서 약정한 바에 따라 Norvatis로부터 받은upfront payment는 물론 향후 running royalty 중 일부를 sublicense fee로서 위스콘신 산단에 지불해야 한다는 판결입니다.

 

한편, 추가 PPA 화합물 20여개를 Wisconsin 대학교수에게 보내 효능을 재확인하기 위한 위탁연구용역에 관련 쟁점이 있습니다. Wisconsin 대학은 공동연구개발계약 범위 내에 속하고 대학교수는 공동발명자, 대학은 그 직무발명의 승계인으로서 권리 공유자라는 입장입니다. 미국법원은 회사 단독 소유권을 부정하고 산단에 공유자 권리를 인정하였습니다.

 

우리나라에서도 대학교수와 위탁연구용약을 자주 합니다. 그 결과물에 대해 대학 산학협력단의 지분권을 부인하고 의뢰자 회사의 단독 권리를 주장하는 경우가 많습니다. 해당 교수가 발명자로 인정된다면, 직무발명 등 관련 법에 따라 판단해 본다면, 설령 해당 대학교수가 용인하더라도 회사의 단독 소유 주장은 인정받기 어렵다 생각합니다.

 

KASAN_대학교수 발명특허의 기술이전, 라이선스 계약서에서 sublicense 조항, 후속 개량발명의 특허출원 및 등록, 공동발명, Sublicense 및 Royalty 등 Collaboration 분쟁 사례 미국 판결.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 15. 15:30
:

 

 

1.26 “Sublicense” shall mean any right granted, sublicense conferred or agreement entered into, between the Licensee and a Third Party permitting any use of the Licensed IP Rights, directly or indirectly, to make, or have made, develop, offer for sale, sell or otherwise commercialize any Licensed Product; provided, however, that a Sublicense shall exclude a bona fide agreement for the evaluation, testing, research, development on behalf of Kite or its Affiliates, or manufacturing on behalf of the Licensee or its Affiliates, or a distributor or reseller agreement, all pursuant to which no Sublicense Revenues are paid to the Licensee.

 

1.27 “Sublicense Revenues” shall mean, with respect to a Sublicense, the aggregate cash (or cash equivalent) or stock or securities (or their equivalent) consideration received by the Licensee or its Affiliates to the extent in consideration for such Sublicense, including consideration for an option to obtain such Sublicense. Such consideration shall include without limitation any upfront, license initiation or signing fees, license maintenance fees, milestone payments, unearned portion of any minimum annual royalty payment or equity. Sublicense Revenues shall exclude [*].

 

3. LICENSE GRANT 

3.1 Licensed IP Rights. Subject to Section 3.2 below, the Licensor Cabaret hereby grants to the Licensee Kite an exclusive (other than as set forth in Section 3.2 and 3.4 below) worldwide royalty bearing license (with the right to grant sublicenses through multiple tiers as set forth hereunder) under the Licensed IP Rights to research, have researched, develop , have developed, make, have made, use, offer for sale, sell, import, export, commercialize and otherwise exploit Licensed Products for use in the Field. Subject to the conditions set forth in Section 3.9 the foregoing license includes the right to grant sublicenses under the Licensed IP Rights, provided that, with respect to sublicenses granted under, Kite shall (a) grant such sublicenses only for consideration and at arm’s-length transactions, and (b) grant such sublicenses only pursuant to written agreements that contain such terms and conditions as may be required for Kite to comply with this Agreement.

 

3.2 License Restrictions. The license granted in Section 3.1 above is and shall remain at all times subject to the following restrictions (and Kite shall ensure that any of its Sublicensee’s shall be subject such restrictions): (i) the Licensor Dr. Eshhar, the Regents and the Government of the United States (the “Government”) reserve the right to use the Patents Rights and associated technology licensed under the Inter-Institutional Agreement last executed on June 22, 2012 (“UCSF IIA”), between Dr. Eshhar, BioSante and The Regents, and disclosed to Kite under Section 2.2.5 above, and the Inter-institutional Agreement dated 19.11.2013 (“NIH Agreement”), for educational and research purposes; (ii) nothing in this Agreement shall confer by estoppel, implication or otherwise, any license or rights under any patents of the Regents other than those patents rights detailed in the USCF IIA, regardless of whether such patents are dominant or subordinate to the Patents Rights defined in the UCSF IIA; (iii) Kite shall not use the name or trademark or logo of the University of California or any campus thereof; in each case to the extent required by the UCSF HA; (iv) the license is subject to the provisions of 37 C.F.R. Part 401 and the rights retained by the Government under the NIH Agreement; and (v) until the last to expire of U.S. Patent 8,211,422 issued July 3, 2012 from Patent Application 08/547,263 filed October 24, 1995 entitled “Chimeric Receptor Genes and Cells Transformed Therewith” and US Patent Application 13/281,560 filed October 26, 2011 entitled “Chimeric Receptor Genes and Cells Transformed Therewith” (hereinafter referred to as the “NIH Patent Estate”) any products embodying the Licensed Patent Rights, or produced through use of the Licensed Patent Rights, shall be manufactured substantially in the United States unless a waiver is granted by the NIH; provided that NIH may waive this requirement upon Kite’s written request which shall not be unreasonably denied; (vi) until the last to expire of the NIH Patent Estate, the Government shall have the irrevocable, royalty-free, paid-up right to practice and have practiced the NIH Patent Estate and Eshhar patents 5,906,936 and 7,741,465, throughout the world by or on behalf of the Government and on behalf of any foreign government or international organization pursuant to any existing or future treaty or agreement to which the Government is a signatory; (vii) until the last to expire of the NIH Patent Estate, the NIH reserves the right to require Cabaret, or its licensees, to grant sublicenses to the patent rights to responsible applicants, on terms that are reasonable under the circumstances when necessary to fulfill health or safety needs or when necessary to meet requirements for public use specified by Federal regulations; and (viii) until the last to expire of the NTH Patent Estate, in addition to the reserved right of Section 3.2(vi), the NIH reserves the right to require Cabaret to grant research licenses to the patent rights on reasonable terms and conditions, for the purpose of encouraging basic research, whether conducted at an academic or corporate facility.

 

3.4 No implied licenses are set forth herein. Except for those licenses expressly granted hereunder in the Field, Cabaret does not grant to Kite any other licenses, either within or without the Field. Kite specifically understands and agrees that except as explicitly set forth herein, Cabaret reserves all rights under the Licensed IP Rights to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, export, distribute and otherwise exploit products incorporating the Licensed IP Rights outside the Field. Without derogating from the generality in Section 3.2 above, Dr. Eshhar and Cabaret reserve the right to use all Licensed IP Rights licensed hereunder for educational and noncommercial research purposes in any and all fields.

 

3.5 In-Licenses. The Licensor Cabaret shall timely pay in full all amounts required to be paid by Cabaret, and timely perform in full all obligations required to be performed by Cabaret, under all In-Licenses. Cabaret promptly shall provide the Licensee Kite with copies of all notices and other deliveries received under the In-Licenses. Without the prior express written consent of Kite, Cabaret shall not (and shall take no action or make no omission to) modify or waive any provision of any In-License that could impair the value of the licenses to Kite herein, or to terminate or have terminated any In-License. If any In-License is terminated for any reason, Cabaret shall make all reasonable efforts to ensure that the Licensor thereunder shall grant a direct license under the Licensed IP Rights thereunder to Kite containing terms and conditions no less favorable to Kite than the terms (including the payment terms) of such In-License, and Kite shall have the right to offset all payments thereunder against any amounts owing to Cabaret hereunder.

 

3.6 Availability of the Licensed IP Rights. The Licensor Cabaret shall provide the Licensee Kite with a copy of all information available to Cabaret relating to the Licensed IP Rights or Licensed Products.

 

3.7 Technical Assistance. Cabaret and Dr. Eshhar shall provide such technical assistance to Kite as Kite reasonably requests regarding the Licensed IP Rights. Kite shall pay to Cabaret and Dr. Eshhar their documented reasonable out-of-pocket costs of providing such technical assistance.

 

3.8 Right of First Offer. In the event that Cabaret proposes to enter into an agreement with any Third Party for the grant to any Third Party of any license, immunity, right or interest of any type whatsoever in or under the Licensed Patent Rights outside the Field, Cabaret shall as soon as practicable notify Kite of such intention (the “Company Notice”), and the Licensee Kite shall have the right, to be exercised by notice to Cabaret to express its interest to negotiate with Cabaret regarding receipt of such license within a period of [*] after the date of the Company Notice (such period, the “Negotiation Period”). During the Negotiation Period, Kite will notify Cabaret within [*] of its interest to negotiate with Cabaret, and in such event Cabaret shall negotiate in good faith with Kite regarding receipt of such license. To the extent that Kite notified Cabaret of its interest to negotiate with Cabaret, as set forth above, prior to the expiration of the Negotiation Period, Cabaret shall not enter into any definitive binding agreement of any kind with a Third Party in relation to such license (other than relating to access to information).

 

3.9 Sublicenses. The Licensee Kite shall be entitled to grant Sublicenses, provided, however, that all Sublicenses shall be subject to the following conditions:

 

3.9.1 The Licensee Kite shall execute a written sublicense with each Sublicensee, which mirrors the restrictive terms hereof and shall provide Cabaret with a copy of each such written sublicense within [*] of execution (and all amendments and modifications thereto within [*] of execution). Kite shall report pursuant to the terms of this Agreement Net Sales of the Licensed Product by all Sublicensees and

 

3.9.2 The Licensee Kite shall use reasonable efforts to add to the Sublicense agreement a clause stating that, in case of a default of payment due by Kite of royalties owing on Net Sales by a Sublicensee, which is not cured within [*] after notice in accordance with this Agreement, then upon the written request of Cabaret, such Sublicensee will make future royalty payments and furnish the reports and documents that are required to be paid or furnished by Kite pursuant to this Agreement with respect to Net Sales by such Sublicensee directly to Cabaret.

 

3.9.3 The Licensee Kite shall, and by this Agreement herewith does, agree to cause its Sublicensees to assume and agree to perform all of the relevant covenants and obligations of Kite to Cabaret contained in this Agreement as fully and to the same extent as if its Sublicensees were Kite hereunder and guarantees Cabaret that its Sublicensees shall abide by each and every applicable provision of this Agreement.

 

4.5 Sublicense Fees. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, with respect to each Sublicense with respect to a Licensed Product, Kite shall pay to Cabaret sublicense fees equal to the applicable percentage set forth below of the Sublicense Revenue therefrom (based on the effective date of such Sublicense) (“Sublicense Fees”):

Notwithstanding the foregoing, with respect to any Sublicense Fees paid to Cabaret on account of Sublicense Revenues received by Kite from a Sublicensee in connection with the achievement of any technical, development, regulatory through commercial launch milestone event for a Licensed Product, Kite shall deduct from such Sublicense Fees the milestone payments made by Kite to Cabaret pursuant to Section 4.5 above with respect to the same Licensed Product.

 

KASAN_Licensor - 대학교수, 대학, 연구소 및 벤처회사 vs 제약회사 Licensee 사이의 바이오신약 후보물질 특허기술 라이선스 계약서에 포함된 sublicense 관련 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 15. 14:30
:

 

 

Affiliates” shall mean any company which directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control of a party to this agreement.

 

Affiliate” shall mean, with respect to any Person, any other Person which directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, such Person. A Person shall be regarded as in control of another Person if it owns, or directly or indirectly controls; at least fifty percent (50%) of the voting stock or other ownership interest of the other Person, or if it directly or indirectly possesses the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the other Person by any means whatsoever.

 

Affiliate” means, with respect to any party, any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with such party, during and for such time as such control exists. For these purposes, “control” shall refer to the ownership, directly or indirectly, of at least [*]% of the voting securities or other ownership interest of the relevant entity.

 

Affiliate” means any Person who, directly or indirectly through one or more intermediates, controls or is controlled by or is under common control with another Person, but only for so long as such relationship exists. For purposes of this definition, the term “control” (including, with correlative meanings, the terms “controlled by” and “under common control with”) as used with respect to a Person means the possession, directly or indirectly through one or more intermediates, of the power to direct, or cause the direction of, the management or policies of such Person, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract or otherwise. Such power will be deemed to exist in the case of ownership, directly or through one or more Affiliates, of fifty percent (50%) or more of the shares of stock entitled to vote for the election of directors, in the case of a corporation, or fifty percent (50%) or more of the equity interest, in the case of any other type of legal entity, or status as a general partner in any partnership. The Parties acknowledge that, in the case of certain entities organized under the laws of certain countries, the maximum percentage ownership permitted by Law for a foreign investor may be less than fifty percent (50%), and in such case such lower percentage shall be substituted in the preceding sentence; provided, that such foreign investor has the power to direct the management and policies of such entity.

 

KASAN_국제계약서에 통상 들어가는 일반조항 Affiliate 정의조항 사례 – 기술이전, 라이선스 계약서 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 15. 08:26
:

 

특허침해분쟁을 화해 종결하면서 라이선스 계약을 체결하였지만, licensee의 계약 위반을 이유로 특허실시 license 계약을 종료하고, 다시 licensee 상대로 하는 특허침해소송을 제기할 수 있다는 미국법원 판결을 소개한 적이 있습니다.

 

우리나라의 유사한 사례로는 특허권자와 전용실시권 계약을 체결한 후 실시권자의 계약위반행위를 이유로 특허침해책임을 인정할 수 있는지 여부가 문제된 사안을 살펴봅니다.

 

1. 특허권에 대한 전용실시계약 체결, 특약사항 및 등록 상황

특허권자 회사로부터 공기정화제특허발명의 등록 특허권에 대하여 전용실시권을 설정받으면서 특허권자 회사에 대해 귀사의 승낙 없이 특허를 임의대로 사용하지 않겠다는 사전승낙 조건을 추가하였습니다. 그 후 라이센시는 특허등록원부에 전용실시권 등록을 마쳤지만, 위 계약상 제한사항을 특허등록원부에 등록하지 않았습니다.

 

2. 실시권자 라이센시의 계약상 특약조항 위반

실시권자는 특허권자의 승낙 없이 임의대로 특허권을 실시하였고, 특허권자는 전용실시권 설정 계약위반, 전용실시권 설정계약범위 외의 실시행위로 특허권침해에 해당한다고 주장하면서 실시권자 라이센시를 형사고소하였습니다.

 

3. 특허법 규정

특허법 제100(전용실시권) 특허권자는 그 특허권에 대하여 타인에게 전용실시권을 설정할 수 있다. 전용실시권을 설정 받은 전용실시권자는 그 설정행위로 정한 범위에서 그 특허발명을 업으로서 실시할 권리를 독점한다.

 

특허법 101(특허권 및 전용실시권의 등록의 효력) 다음 각 호의 어느 하나에 해당하는 사항은 등록하여야만 효력이 발생한다.

1. 특허권의 이전(상속이나 그 밖의 일반승계에 의한 경우는 제외한다), 포기에 의한 소멸 또는 처분의 제한

2. 전용실시권의 설정·이전(상속이나 그 밖의 일반승계에 의한 경우는 제외한다변경·소멸(혼동에 의한 경우는 제외한다) 또는 처분의 제한

3. 특허권 또는 전용실시권을 목적으로 하는 질권의 설정·이전(상속이나 그 밖의 일반승계에 의한 경우는 제외한다변경·소멸(혼동에 의한 경우는 제외한다) 또는 처분의 제한

 

4. 법원판단 특허침해 불성립

법원은 전용실시권 설정계약상의 제한사항을 등록하지 않은 경우, 그 제한을 위반하여 특허발명을 실시한 전용실시권자에게 특허법 위반죄가 성립하지 않는다고 판결하였습니다. 법원은 실시권자의 전용실시권 설정계약을 위반한 계약상 민사책임은 인정될 수 있지만, 등록되지 않는 특약사항으로 전용실시권자의 실시권한을 제한할 수 없다는 입장에서 전용실시권자의 특허실시행위는 특허권 침해에 해당하지 않는다고 명확하게 판결하였습니다.

5. 대법원 2013. 1. 24. 선고 20114645 판결 요지

특허법 제101조 제1항은 다음 각 호에 해당하는 사항은 이를 등록하지 아니하면 그 효력이 발생하지 아니한다.”고 하면서, 2호에 전용실시권의 설정·이전(상속 기타 일반승계에 의한 경우를 제외한다변경·소멸(혼동에 의한 경우를 제외한다) 또는 처분의 제한을 규정하고 있다.

 

따라서 설정계약으로 전용실시권의 범위에 관하여 특별한 제한을 두고도 이를 등록하지 않으면 그 효력이 발생하지 않는 것이므로, 전용실시권자가 등록되어 있지 않은 제한을 넘어 특허발명을 실시하더라도, 특허권자에 대하여 채무불이행 책임을 지게 됨은 별론으로 하고 특허권 침해가 성립하는 것은 아니다.

 

6. 등록주의 여부에 따른 구별

대법원 판결은 전용실시권이 그 설정등록으로 발생, 소멸, 변경된다는 등록주의에 따른 것입니다. 그 기초인 전용실시권 설정계약 위반을 이유로 그 계약이 해지되었는지 여부와는 명확하게 구별하였습니다.

 

그런데, 미국 특허법과 우리나라 특허법은 전용실시권의 발생 및 소멸에 대해 다른 입장을 취하고 있습니다. 따라서, 실시권자 라이선시의 실시권 설정 계약위반 사안에 대해 특허침해 책임여부에 관해서도 서로 다른 결론에 도달할 수 있습니다. 예를 들어, 미국사안과 같이 전용실시권자의 라이선스 계약위반행위가 있더라도 유효한 전용실시권 등록이 존속하고 있는 한 licensee의 계약위반에 따른 책임은 별론으로 하더라도 적어도 특허침해는 성립하지 않습니다. 반면, 미국법원은 계약위반책임과 별개로 특허침해도 가능하다는 취지입니다.

 

KASAN_특허권 전용실시권 허여계약에 특허발명실시 전 특허권자의 승낙 요건 특약 존재 – 전용실시권 등록 후 실시권자의 특약위반 시 계약위반책임과 별개로 특허권침해책임 불인정 - 독립.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 14. 15:23
:

 

1. License 대상특허 범위 쟁점: 미국 Endo Pharm Opana® ER 특허분쟁 판결

특허 license에서 자주 쟁점이 되는 사항이고 실제 발생할 수 있는 사안입니다. 아래 그림에서 표시한 각 특허 사이의 관계와 License Agreement 조항의 문언표현을 살펴보시기 바랍니다.

 

 

 

(1) license 대상특허 범위 및 쟁점

License 계약서에 라이선스 대상특허 '250 및 그 후속특허 "including any continuation, continuation-in-part and divisional patent applications that claim priority to Opana® ER Patents"로 표현되어 있습니다. 여기서 '250 특허가 Opana® ER Patents에 해당합니다.

 

계약체결 후 등록된 위 '216 특허와 '122 특허가 위와 같은 계약문언의 범위에 해당하는지 여부가 쟁점입니다. 그림에서 보듯 노란색 '250 특허와 녹색의 쟁점 특허 2건은 직접 연결된 관계가 아닙니다.

 

다만, 청색으로 표시한 '357 출원이 중간에 개입되어 있습니다. 그것을 매개로 녹색표시특허들도 노란색 특허와 동일하게 license 대상특허로 해석할 수 있는지 문제됩니다.

 

(2) 미국법원 판결

CAFC 판결은 위와 같은 상황에서 '216 특허와 '122 특허는 license 대상 특허범위에 포함되지 않는다고 판결하였습니다. 기타 묵시적 license도 인정하지 않았습니다. , licensor Endolicensee Actavis, Roxanegeneric 제품 발매에 대해 기존 등록특허에 관하여 체결한 license의 존재에도 불구하고 다시 추가 등록한 '216 특허와 '122 특허에 기초한 특허권을 행사할 수 있다고 보았습니다.

 

Generic 제품발매 회사로서는 불의타에 해당하는 황당한 상황을 맞았습니다. CAFC 3인 합의재판부 중 1명의 소수의견 Dissent Opinion에서는 license 대상을 특허로 표현한 것과 제품으로 표현한 것을 엄격하게 구별해야 하고, 적어도 제품을 기준으로 라이선스 계약을 체결한 경우 위 특허도 라이선스 대상특허에 해당한다는 의견 설시가 흥미롭습니다. 공감할 내용이 많은데도 불구하고 아쉽게도 소수의견에 그쳤습니다. 특허 라이선스 실무공부 삼아 읽어 보시기 바랍니다.

 

(3) No Implied License 조항

CAFC 판결에서는 계약서의 다음과 같이 묵시적 라이선스를 허용하지 않는다는 계약조항을 중요한 판단근거로 삼았습니다. 라이선스 계약 실무상 매우 중요한 포인트입니다.

 

“Endo does not grant to Actavis [or Roxane] . . . any license, right or immunity, whether by implication, estoppel or otherwise, other than as expressly granted herein.”

 

참고자료로 다른 계약서에서 표준형식의 조항을 인용합니다. "No Other Rights. No rights, other than those expressly set forth in this Agreement are granted to either Party hereunder, and no additional rights will be deemed granted to either Party by implication, estoppel, or otherwise. All rights not expressly granted by either Party to the other hereunder are reserved."

 

Licensee의 묵시적 라이선스 주장은 부제소조항(not to sue)에도 근거를 두고 있습니다. licensee에 대한 소송을 제기하지 않는다는 계약조항은 곧 후속 등록 특허권에 대한 license 합의로도 해석할 수 있다는 주장입니다.

 

그라나, CAFC 판결은 위와 같이 묵시적 허락을 배제하는 명시적 계약조항을 우선해야 한다고 명확하게 밝혔습니다. 묵시적 라이선스 이론이 적용될 수 있고, 따라서 상충되는 해석이 가능한 상황에서도, 처분문서에 해당하는 계약서에 명시적으로 기재된 묵시적 라이선스를 배제한다는 문언이 훨씬 더 강력한 효력을 발휘한다는 점을 명확하게 판시하였습니다.

 

위 판결은 Licensee 입장에서 조금 억울한 면이 있을 것입니다. 실무적 대응방안으로는 특허만을 라이선스 대상범위의 기준으로 설정하는 것보다 여기에 더하여 제품기술을 라이선스 범위설정의 기준으로 함께 설정한다면 안정할 것입니다.

 

기술이전이나 license 당시에는 등록되지 않았고 독립된 특허출원도 아니었으나 그 후 분할출원, 연속출원 등을 통해 등록되는 특허문제는 매우 중요합니다. 관련 쟁점에 관한 좋은 참고가 될 분쟁사례와 판결입니다. CAFC 판결문을 소수의견까지 모두 꼼꼼하게 살펴보시길 권합니다.

 

2. 영문계약조항 사례 샘플

(1) Example Definition, 계약대상 특허정의 조항

Patent Rights” means, with respect to each country in the Territory (except as otherwise stated to be with respect to any country in or outside the Territory), (a) patent applications (including provisional applications) pending in such country, (b) any patents issuing in such country from such patent applications (including certificates of invention), (c) all patents and patent applications issued or pending, as applicable, in such country based on, corresponding to or claiming the priority date(s) of any of the foregoing, (d) rights in such country derived from any of (a), (b) or (c), including any substitutions, extensions (including supplemental protection certificates), registrations, confirmations, reissues, divisionals, continuations, continuations in part, reexaminations, renewals, revalidations, revivals, patents of addition, and (e) all patents and patent applications issued or pending, as applicable, in such country claiming overlapping priority therefrom.

 

(2) Example 라이선스 계약조항 샘플

9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MATTERS.

9.1 Existing Intellectual Property.

(a) Other than as provided in this Agreement, neither Party grants any right, title, or interest in any Patent Right, information, or other intellectual property right Controlled by such Party to the other Party.

 

(b) Except as otherwise provided herein, Licensor shall be responsible for the preparation, filing, prosecution (including, without limitation, any interferences, inter partes proceedings, reissue proceedings, cancellations, oppositions, and reexaminations), and maintenance of any and all Licensed Serenity Patent Rights. Licensor shall consult with Licensee, and consider Licensee’s comments, in good faith with respect to the preparation, filing, prosecution, and maintenance of any Licensed CPEX Patent Rights or Licensed Reprise Patent Rights to the extent that Licensor has the right, under any agreement with any applicable licensor, to file, prosecute, and maintain such Licensed Patent Rights.

 

(c) Licensee agrees and acknowledges that Licensor intends to continue to use, in Licensor’s discretion, patent counsel currently retained by Licensor to prosecute and maintain the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights. Licensee shall execute, acknowledge and deliver any instruments, and to do all such other acts, as may be necessary or appropriate in order to enable such patent counsel to continue to prosecute and maintain such Licensed Serenity Patent Rights. The Parties shall reasonably consult with each other, and shall consider any comments from each other in good faith, with respect to the preparation, filing, prosecution, and maintenance of such Licensed Serenity Patent Rights and patent strategy for the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights. Licensee shall reimburse Licensor for all costs and expenses incurred by Licensor after the Effective Date in the preparation, filing, prosecution, and maintenance of any Licensed Serenity Patent Rights in the Territory, up to an amount not to exceed [*] Dollars ($[*]), which is the estimated cost set forth on Schedule 9.1(c). Licensor shall provide to Licensee copies of any papers relating to the filing, prosecution or maintenance of the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights promptly upon their being filed or received. Licensee shall not knowingly take any action during prosecution and maintenance of the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights.

 

(d) Licensor shall not knowingly permit any of the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights to be abandoned in any country in the Territory without Licensor first giving Licensee an opportunity to assume full responsibility for the continued prosecution and maintenance thereof. In the event that Licensee decides not to continue the prosecution or maintenance of a Licensed Serenity Patent Rights in any country in the Territory, Licensor will provide Licensee with notice of this decision at least thirty (30) days prior to any pending lapse or abandonment thereof. In the event that Licensee elects to assume responsibility for such prosecution and maintenance within thirty (30) days of Licensor’s notice, Section 9.1(c) shall thereafter apply to such Licensed Serenity Patent Rights except that the role of Licensee and Licensor shall be reversed thereunder (except further that Licensee will continue to be responsible for all costs and expenses thereafter incurred in the preparation, filing, prosecution, and maintenance of any Licensed Serenity Patent Rights). Any such Serenity Patent Right that is subject to such election by Licensee shall otherwise continue to be subject to all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement in the same way as the other Licensed Serenity Patent Rights.

 

9.2 Inventions by Licensee.

Disclosure. Licensee shall promptly disclose to Licensor the invention of any Licensee Inventions.

 

Ownership. As between the Parties, all Licensee Inventions will be owned and Controlled by Licensee.

 

Patent Filings.

(i) Licensee, at its expense, will have sole discretion and responsibility to prepare, file, prosecute, and maintain any patent applications and patents claiming Licensee Inventions. The Parties’ respective patent counsel shall meet no fewer than once per Calendar Year to discuss strategies for the preparation, filing, prosecution, and maintenance of any such patent applications and patents claiming Licensee Inventions. Licensee shall consider in good faith any comments provided by Licensor with respect to the foregoing. In the event of any dispute between Parties with respect to such strategies, either Party may notify the Alliance Managers for purposes of resolving such dispute; provided, however, that Licensee shall have the final decision-making authority with respect to any such dispute.

 

(ii) Licensee shall not knowingly permit any Patent Rights with claims to any Licensee Inventions to be abandoned in any country without Licensee first giving Licensor an opportunity to assume full responsibility for the continued prosecution and maintenance thereof. In the event that Licensee decides not to continue the prosecution or maintenance of any Patent Right claiming a Licensee Invention in any country, Licensee will provide Licensor with notice of this decision at least thirty (30) days prior to any pending lapse or abandonment thereof. In the event that Licensor elects to assume responsibility for such prosecution and maintenance within thirty (30) days of Licensor’s notice, Section 9.1(c) shall thereafter apply to such Patent Right claiming such Licensee Invention except that the role of Licensee and Licensor shall be reversed thereunder.

 

9.3 Infringement, Violation, or Misappropriation by Third Parties.

 

(a) Notice. Each Party shall promptly notify the other Party in writing of any alleged or threatened infringement, violation, or misappropriation by any Third Party of the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights of which it becomes aware, and following such notification, the Parties shall confer as to any response thereto. The notice shall set forth the facts of such infringement, violation, or misappropriation in reasonable detail.

 

(b) Response to Infringement, Violation, or Misappropriation by Third Parties.

(i) If a Third Party is infringing, violating, or misappropriating, or either Party reasonably believes a Third Party may be infringing, violating, or misappropriating any Enforceable IP Right in any country in the Territory, Licensee shall have the first right, but not the obligation, to institute, prosecute, and control any action or proceeding with respect to such infringement, violation, or misappropriation by counsel of its own selection, at its expense. Licensor shall have the right to participate in such action and be represented, if it so desires, by counsel of its own selection and at its own expense. To the extent required by Applicable Laws, Licensor agrees to be joined as a party plaintiff (with Licensor having the right to be represented, if it so desires, by counsel of its own selection and at its own expense) if necessary for Licensee to bring and prosecute such action or proceeding, and to give Licensee reasonable assistance and authority to bring and prosecute such action or proceeding. If Licensee fails to bring an action or proceeding within ninety (90) days after receiving or giving written notice pursuant to Section 9.3(a), then Licensor shall have the right, but not the obligation, to bring and control any such action by counsel of its own selection, at its expense (with Licensee having the right to participate in such action and be represented, if it so desires, by counsel of its own selection and at its own expense). To the extent required by Applicable Laws, Licensee agrees to be joined as a party plaintiff (with Licensee having the right to be represented, if it so desires, by counsel of its own selection and expense therein) if necessary for Licensor to bring and prosecute such action or proceeding, and to give Licensor reasonable assistance and authority to bring and prosecute such action or proceeding. No settlement of any such action or consent judgment or other voluntary final disposition which restricts the scope, or adversely affects the enforceability, of an Enforceable IP Right may be entered into by either Party without the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned.

 

(ii) Each Party shall share in any recoveries obtained in connection with any action or proceeding described in Section 9.3(b)(i) as follows:

(A) each Party’s costs and expenses incurred in connection with bringing and prosecuting any such action or proceeding, including without limitation attorneys’ fees, first shall be reimbursed from such recoveries, and if such recovery is insufficient to cover all such costs and expenses of both Parties, it shall be shared in proportion to the total of such costs and expenses incurred by each Party, and

(B) if Licensee controlled such action or proceeding Licensee shall receive one hundred percent (100%) of such remaining recoveries, provided that such recoveries shall be deemed Net Sales for purposes of Section 8.3(a)(i); and if Licensor controlled such action or proceeding, each Party shall receive fifty percent (50%) of such remaining recoveries, provided that Licensee’s portion shall not be deemed as Net Sales for purposes of Section 8.3(a)(i) in such case.

 

(c) Withdrawal. If either Party brings an action or proceeding under Section 9.3(b)(i) and subsequently ceases to pursue or withdraws from such action or proceeding, it shall promptly notify the other Party and the other Party may substitute itself for the withdrawing Party under the terms of Section 9.3(b)(i).

 

(d) Oppositions by Parties. If either Party desires to bring an opposition, action for declaratory judgment, nullity action, interference, reexamination, inter partes proceeding, or other attack upon the validity, title, or enforceability of any intellectual property right Controlled by a Third Party that Covers the Product in the Field in any country in the Territory, such Party shall so notify the other Party and the Parties shall promptly confer to determine whether to bring such action or the manner in which to settle such action. Each Party shall be entitled to separate representation in any such action by counsel of its own choice and at its own expense, and shall cooperate fully with the other Party. The costs of any such action shall be borne by the Party bringing the action, and such Party shall retain any recoveries obtained in connection therewith.

 

9.4 Infringement of Third Party Rights.

(a) Notice. If the Exploitation of the Product pursuant to this Agreement results in a claim, action, suit, or proceeding that such activity infringes or misappropriates the intellectual property rights of a Third Party (“Third Party Infringement Claim”), the Party first receiving notice thereof shall promptly notify in writing the other Party thereof. The notice shall set forth the facts of the Third Party Infringement Claim in reasonable detail.

 

(b) Litigation.

(i) Licensee shall have the sole right, but not the obligation, to defend, at its expense, against any Third Party Infringement Claim. Licensee shall have full control over the defense and settlement of such Third Party Infringement Claim, provided that Licensee shall not settle any Third Party Infringement Claim that is subject to indemnification pursuant to Section 11.1 without the prior written consent of Licensor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. Licensor shall cooperate with Licensee, at Licensee’s expense and reasonable request, in such defense and shall have the right to be represented by counsel of its own choice, at Licensor’s expense. Licensee will pay any losses incurred in defense or settlement of, or imposed pursuant to settlement of or judgment on, such Third Party Infringement Claim.

 

(ii) If Licensee decides not to commence a defense against any Third Party Infringement Claim pursuant to Section 9.4(b)(i), then Licensee will promptly notify Licensor of such decision in a timely manner so as to allow Licensor, who shall have the right, but not the obligation, to commence such a defense by counsel of its own selection, at its expense (with Licensee having the right to participate in such defense and be represented, if it so desires, by counsel of its own selection and at its own expense). Licensor shall thereupon have full control over the defense and settlement of such Third Party Infringement Claim, provided that Licensor shall not settle any Third Party Infringement Claim without the prior written consent of Licensee, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. Licensee shall cooperate with Licensor, at Licensor’s expense and reasonable request, in such defense and shall have the right to be represented by counsel of its own choice, at Licensee’s expense. Licensor will pay any losses incurred in defense or settlement of, or imposed pursuant to settlement of or judgment on, such Third Party Infringement Claim, subject to Section 11.1.

 

(iii) Notwithstanding any provisions set forth herein to the contrary, Licensor shall be responsible for continuing to manage, at Licensor’s expense, that certain litigation with Ferring Pharmaceuticals that is described in Schedule 10.2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any settlement of any such action or consent judgment or other voluntary final disposition with respect to the litigation with Ferring Pharmaceuticals described in Schedule 10.2, which restricts the scope, or adversely affects the enforceability, of an Enforceable IP Right may not be entered into by Licensor without the prior written consent of the Licensee, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned.

 

(c) Oppositions by Third Parties. If any patent, trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property right within the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights becomes after the Effective Date the subject of any proceeding commenced by a Third Party in connection with an opposition, reexamination request, action for declaratory judgment, nullity action, interference, inter partes proceeding, or other attack upon the validity, title, or enforceability thereof, then Licensee shall control such defense at its sole cost. Licensee shall permit Licensor to participate in the proceeding to the extent permissible under Applicable Laws, and to be represented by its own counsel in such proceeding, at Licensor’s expense. If Licensee elects not to defend against such action with respect to any such intellectual property right with the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights within ninety (90) days after first receiving notice or otherwise becoming aware of such action or proceeding, then Licensor shall have the right to assume defense of such Third Party action at its own expense. Any awards or amounts received in bringing any such action shall be first allocated to reimburse the Parties’ expenses in such action, and any remaining amounts shall be retained by the Party defending against such proceeding.

 

KASAN_기술이전, 라이선스 계약서에서 License 대상 IP 및 특허 정의조항, 적용범위, 계약체결 후 발명 출원 및 특허 쟁점, 제3자의 이의신청 또는 침해소송대응 관련 계약서 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 14. 13:36
:

 

10. REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, AND COVENANTS.

 

10.1 Mutual Representations and Warranties. Licensor and Licensee (each, a “Representing Party”) each hereby represents and warrants to each other, as of the Effective Date and except as otherwise set forth in Schedule 10.2 (in the case of Licensor) and Schedule 10.3 (the case of Licensee), that:

(a) such Representing Party is a corporation or limited liability company, as applicable, duly organized and subsisting under the laws of its jurisdiction of organization;

(b) such Representing Party has the power, authority, and legal right, and is free, to enter into this Agreement on behalf of itself and its Affiliates and to perform its respective obligations hereunder and to cause its Affiliates to perform their respective obligations hereunder;

(c) such Representing Party has the power, authority, and legal right to own and operate its property and assets and to carry on its business as it is now being conducted and as it is contemplated to be conducted by this Agreement;

(d) this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid, and binding obligation of such Representing Party and is enforceable against it in accordance with its terms, subject to the effects of bankruptcy, insolvency, or other laws of general application affecting the enforcement of creditor rights and judicial principles affecting the availability of specific performance and general principles of equity, whether enforceability is considered a proceeding at law or equity;

(e) the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of such Representing Party’s and its Affiliates’ obligations hereunder (i) have been duly authorized and approved by all necessary action by such Representing Party, and all necessary consents, approvals, and authorizations of all Regulatory Authorities and other Third Parties required to be obtained by such Representing Party in connection with the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of its obligations hereunder have been obtained; (ii) do not conflict with or violate any requirement of Applicable Laws or any provision of the articles of incorporation, bylaws, limited partnership agreement, or any similar instrument of such Representing Party, as applicable, in any material way; and (iii) do not, and will not, conflict with or otherwise interfere with in such a manner as to result in a violation, breach, or default under or require any consent that has not been obtained under any contract between such Representing Party and any Third Party;

(f) there are no, and shall be no, liens, conveyances, mortgages, assignments, encumbrances, or other agreements that would prevent or impair such Representing Party’s or any of its Affiliates’ full and complete exercise of the terms and conditions of the Agreement;

(g) such Representing Party and its Affiliates shall at all times comply with all Applicable Laws relating or pertaining to their obligations under the Agreement;

(h) with respect to the services provided hereunder to the other Party, its Affiliates, and their respective employees, officers, contractors and agents who perform such services have the experience, capability, and resources to efficiently and skillfully perform the services, and shall perform, where applicable, all such services in a professional and workmanlike manner and in accordance with the generally accepted then-current standards, forms, procedures, and techniques established from time to time by the industry;

(i) all of such Representing Party’s employees, officers, contractors, and consultants have executed agreements requiring assignment to such Representing Party of all inventions created by such persons in the course of their employment by such Representing Party and obligating each such employee, officer, contractor, and consultant to maintain and safeguard the confidentiality of (i) any information that is confidential to such Representing Party or (ii) any information that is confidential to any other Person and that such Representing Party is obligated to maintain and safeguard as confidential; and

(j) neither such Representing Party, nor any of its employees, officers, subcontractors, or consultants who have rendered or will render services relating to the Product: (i) has ever been debarred or is subject or debarment or convicted of a crime for which an entity or person could be debarred under 21 U.S.C. Section 335a or (ii) has ever been under indictment for a crime for which a person or entity could be debarred under said Section 335a.

 

10.2 Additional Representations, Warranties, and Covenants of Licensor. Licensor hereby represents, warrants, and covenants to Licensee, as of the Effective Date and except as otherwise set forth in Schedule 10.2, that:

(a) Licensor is entitled to grant the rights and licenses purported to be granted to Licensee under this Agreement, and to assign the rights purported to be assigned to Licensee under this Agreement, and is not currently bound by any agreement with any Third Party, or by any outstanding order, judgment, or decree of any court or administrative agency, that restricts it from granting to Licensee the rights, licenses and sublicenses purported to be so granted in this Agreement;

(b) Licensor is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title, and interest, in, to, and under the Licensed Rights and has the right under the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights and the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights to grant the sublicenses thereunder in accordance with Section 2.2;

(c) the Licensed Rights are free and clear of any liens, charges, encumbrances, or judgments, and Licensor has sufficient rights to grant the licenses and rights purported to be granted herein, free and clear of any security interests, claims, encumbrances, or charges of any kind;

(d) Licensor has not granted, and will not grant during the term of this Agreement, any right, option, license, or interest in or to any of the Licensed Rights that is in conflict with the rights assigned or granted to Licensee under this Agreement;

(e) there is no legal, administrative, arbitration, or other proceeding, suit, claim, or action of any nature, judgment, decree, decision, injunction, writ, or order pending, or to Licensor’s knowledge threatened by, against or involving Licensor, regarding the Licensed Rights, whether at law or in equity, before or by any Third Party, and Licensor has not received any written communications alleging that it has violated, through the manufacture, Development, import, or other exploitation of the Product, any intellectual property rights of any Third Party;

(f) to Licensor’s knowledge:

(i) the patents in the issued Licensed Serenity Patent Rights, the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights, and the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights are valid and enforceable; and

(ii) no Third Party has asserted that any of the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights is invalid or unenforceable;

(g) all applications, registrations, maintenance and renewal fees due in respect of any of the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights and, to Licensor’s knowledge, the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights and the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights, have been paid and all documents and certificates required to be filed with the relevant agencies for the purpose of maintaining such Licensed Serenity Patent Rights, and to Licensor’s knowledge, the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights and Licensed CPEX Patent Rights have been filed;

(h) none of the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights, the Licensed Serenity Know-How and, to Licensor’s knowledge, none of the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights and the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights were developed with funding from any Governmental Authority such that any Governmental Authority has any march in rights or other rights to use the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights, the License Serenity Know-How, the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights, or the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights;

(i) to Licensor’s knowledge, no Third Party has infringed or misappropriated any of the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights;

(j) all inventors of any inventions included within the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights and, to the knowledge of Licensor, the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights and the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights have assigned their entire right, title, and interest in and to such inventions and the corresponding patents and patent applications to Licensor, Reprise, or CPEX, as applicable, and have been listed as inventors in the Licensed Serenity Patent Rights, the Licensed CPEX Patent Rights, and the Licensed Reprise Patent Rights, as applicable;

(k) no agreements that Licensor or its Affiliates may have with any Third Party provide such Third Party with any rights of first offer, rights of first refusal, or any other rights to make, have made, use, conduct Clinical Studies for, sell, offer for sale, have sold, import, export, or otherwise Exploit the Product in the Field in the Territory or the right to use the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights in connection with the Exploitation of the Product in the Field in the Territory; and Licensor has received no notice from a Third Party of any suit, action, proceeding, or arbitration pending or threatened against it that the proposed terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the Parties’ performance in accordance therewith, do or shall conflict or interfere with in a manner resulting in a breach or default under, or other violation of, any agreements that Licensor or its Affiliates may have with any Third Party;

to Licensor’s knowledge,

(i) each of the CPEX License Agreement and the Reprise License Agreement is valid and enforceable in accordance with its terms, is in full force and effect, and there are no approvals or consents required to make it effective, (ii) Licensor has supplied Licensee with a true and correct copy of the CPEX License Agreement and the Reprise License Agreement , together with all amendments, waivers, or other changes thereto, (iii) Licensor has performed all material obligations required to be performed by it in connection with the CPEX License Agreement and the Reprise License Agreement, (iv) Licensor shall not materially breach and is not in material breach of the CPEX License Agreement or the Reprise License Agreement, (v) Licensor is not in receipt of any claim of default, cure notice, or show cause notice under the CPEX License Agreement or the Reprise License Agreement, and (vi) there is no current material breach or anticipated material breach by any other party to the CPEX License Agreement or the Reprise License Agreement;

(m) (i) Licensor is the named sponsor of the First Approved NDA for the Product; and (ii) with respect to all Regulatory Documentation to obtain Regulatory Approvals for the Product in the Field: (A) the data, information and/or all other documents in Licensor’s or its Affiliates submissions were, are and shall be free from fraud or material falsity, and neither Licensor nor its Affiliates has made any material misrepresentation or omission in connection with such data; (B) the Regulatory Approvals have not been and will not be obtained either through bribery or the payment of illegal gratuities by Licensor; (C) the data, information and/or all other documents in Licensor’s or its Affiliates’ submissions are, were and shall be accurate and reliable for purposes of supporting approval of the submissions; and (D) the Regulatory Approvals shall be obtained without illegal or unethical behavior of any kind by Licensor or its Affiliates; provided that Licensor shall not be deemed to be in breach of this Section 10.2(m) if the violation of this Section 10.2(m) results from the action or omission of Licensee of Licensee’s Affiliates, Sublicensees, or contractors (other than Licensor);

(n) Licensor believes in good faith, based on the information set forth in Schedule 10.2(n), that FDA will consider amending or supplementing the First Approved NDA (or the related IND) in the manner described in Schedule 10.2(n); provided, however, that Licensor cannot assure that FDA will approve such amendment or supplement.

(o) except as expressly permitted hereunder, Licensor agrees not to, and agrees to cause its Affiliates and Sublicensees not to (i) assign, transfer, convey or otherwise encumber any right, title or interest in or to the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or any Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product, (ii) grant in any manner any license or other right, title or interest in or to any of the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or the Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product, or (iii) agree to or otherwise become bound by any covenant not to sue for any infringement, misuse or other action or inaction with respect to any of the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or the Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product; and

(p) other than the CPEX License Agreement, the Reprise License Agreement, the Renaissance Supply Agreements, and the other Third Party Supply Agreements, Licensor and/or its Affiliates have not entered into any agreements with any Third Party, pursuant to which any Third Party has granted to Licensor, or Licensor has granted to any Third Party, any rights to licenses to, in or under any of the Licensed Rights or the Sublicensed Rights or other intellectual property rights that relate to the Product, or relating to the manufacture of the Product.

 

10.3 Additional Representations, Warranties, and Covenants of Licensee. Licensee hereby represents, warrants, and covenants to Licensor, as of the Effective Date and except as otherwise stated in Schedule 10.3, that:

(a) if, during the term of this Agreement Licensee has reason to believe that it or any of its employees, officers, subcontractors, or consultants rendering services relating to the Product: (i) is or will be debarred or convicted of a crime under 21 U.S.C. Section 335a, or (ii) is or will be under indictment under said Section 335a, then Licensee shall immediately notify Licensor in writing;

(b) as of the Effective Date, there is no legal, administrative, arbitration, or other proceeding, suit, claim, or action of any nature, judgment, decree, decision, injunction, writ, or order pending or, to the knowledge of Licensee’s senior management, threatened by, against Licensee regarding this Agreement, whether at law or in equity, before or by any Third Party; and Licensee shall provide notice of any of the foregoing to the extent it affects Licensee’s performance of its obligations under this Agreement;

(c) except for information provided by Licensor, its Affiliates or Sublicensees: (i) the data and information in Licensee’s submissions and modifications of Regulatory Documentation relating to the Product shall be free from fraud or material falsity; (ii) Regulatory Approvals for the Product hereafter obtained will not be obtained either through bribery or the payment of illegal gratuities by Licensee; (iii) the data and information in Licensee’s submissions and modifications of any Regulatory Documentation shall be accurate and reliable; and (iv) any such the Regulatory Approvals will be obtained without illegal or unethical behavior of any kind by Licensee; provided that Licensee shall not be deemed to be in breach of this Section 10.3(c) if the violation of this Section 10.3(c) results from the action or omission of Licensor or its Affiliates, Sublicensees (other than Licensee), or contractors; and

(d) except as expressly permitted hereunder, Licensee agrees not to, and agrees to cause its Affiliates and Sublicensees not to (i) assign, transfer, convey or otherwise encumber any right, title or interest in or to the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or any Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product, (ii) grant in any manner any license or other right, title or interest in or to any of the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or the Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product, (iii) agree to or otherwise become bound by any covenant not to sue for any infringement, misuse or other action or inaction with respect to any of the Licensed Rights, the Sublicensed Rights, or the Regulatory Approvals and Documentation in respect of the Product, or (iv) bring any action or proceeding or otherwise assert any claim under any Applicable Law in the event any licensee (or sublicensee or any entity or person acting on its behalf) initiates any proceeding or otherwise assert any claim in any court, administrative agency, or other forum with jurisdiction over such proceeding or claim, that any of the Licensed Rights or Sublicensed Rights are invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed, violated, or misappropriated. In the event that Licensee or any Affiliate or Sublicensee of Licensee initiates any proceeding or otherwise asserts any claim in violation of clause (iv) of this Section 10.3, and the result thereof is a final decision, ruling, holding, award, or other disposition to the effect that any of the Licensed Rights or Sublicensed Rights are valid, enforceable, or infringed, violated, or misappropriated, then each of the royalty rates set forth in the table in Section 8.3(a) will each be increased by [*] and the party initiating such proceeding or otherwise asserting such claim shall pay the attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred by Licensor in defending against such proceeding or claim.

 

10.4 Inaccuracies. Without limiting either Party’s rights and remedies at law, in equity or under this Agreement, if, at any point in time (not just at the times when the warranties are deemed granted), either Party becomes aware of any inaccuracies in the foregoing warranties and representations, such Party shall promptly notify the other Party of such inaccuracies, with a detailed written explanation.

 

KASAN_제약분야 기술이전 및 독점라이선스 계약서 중에서 진술보증 조항 REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND COVEANTS – 권리진술 및 독점권 보장의무 등 상세한 내용을 매우 구체적으로 기재하는 방식의 .pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 13. 13:00
:

 

1. 진술 및 보증조항 관련 분쟁

정유회사의 M&A 주식양수도계약서에서 '양도인은 양수인에게 주식양수도계약 체결일 및 양수도 실행일에 일체의 행정법규를 위반한 사실이 없고, 이와 관련하여 행정기관으로부터 조사를 받고 있거나 협의를 진행하는 것은 없다는 내용의 진술 및 보증조항, 나아가 '양수도 실행일 이후 보증 위반사항이 발견된 경우나 약속사항 위반으로 손해가 발생할 경우 500억원을 초과하지 않는 범위 내에서 배상하기로 한다'는 책임조항이 포함되어 있었습니다.

 

그런데, 양도인 회사는 군용유류 구매입찰에서 담합행위 등 공정거래법을 위반했다는 이유로 거액의 과징금 납부명령을 받았고 거액의 손해배상청구소송까지 제기 받았습니다. 이에 양수인이 진술 및 보증조항 위반을 이유로 책임조항을 적용하여 양도인에 대한 손해배상청구 소송을 제기하였습니다.

 

2. 항소심 서울고등법원 200819678 판결

항소심 법원은 양수인도 진술 및 보증위반 사항을 알면서도 계약을 체결했다는 이유로 양도인의 책임을 인정하지 않았습니다. 판결문 중 핵심부분을 인용하면 다음과 같습니다. "양수인도 이 사건 담합행위에 직접 참여했던 탓에 주식양수도계약 체결 당시에 이미 이 사건 진술 및 보증 조항의 위반사실을 알고 있었고, 계약협상 및 가격산정에 반영할 수 있었음에도 방치하였다가 이후 위반사실이 존재한다는 사정을 들어 양도인 피고에게 책임을 묻는 것은 공평의 이념 및 신의칙상 허용될 수 없으므로, 양도인 피고는 위와 같은 악의의 주식양수인인 원고에 대하여 이 사건 진술 및 보증 조항의 위반에 따른 책임을 부담하지 않는다."

 

3. 대법원 201264253 판결

원심판결을 파기 환송하였습니다. "이 사건 주식양수도계약의 양수도 실행일 이후에 이 사건 진술 및 보증 조항의 위반사항이 발견되고 그로 인하여 손해가 발생하면, 원고가 그 위반사항을 계약체결 당시 알았는지 여부와 관계없이, 피고들이 원고에게 그 위반사항과 상당인과관계 있는 손해를 배상하기로 하는 합의를 한 것으로 봄이 상당하다.

 

양수인 원고가 이 사건 진술 및 보증조항과 관련된 이 사건 담합행위를 알고 있었고 이 사건 담합행위로 인한 공정거래위원회의 제재 가능성 등을 이 사건 주식양수도대금 산정에 반영할 기회를 가지고 있었다고 하더라도 그러한 점만으로 원고의 손해배상청구가 공평의 이념 및 신의칙에 반한다고 볼 수 없다."

 

4. 실무적 함의

대법원 판결은 계약서 문언이 가장 중요하다는 원칙을 다시 한번 확인하였습니다. 비록 계약체결 당시 당사자가 진술 및 보증 조항의 위반사실을 알고 있었다고 해도 계약서 효력을 함부로 부정할 수 없다고 명확하게 판결하였습니다.

 

처분문서인 계약서의 계약문언이 그 객관적 의미가 명확하다면 특별한 사정이 없는 한 문언대로의 의사표시의 존재와 내용을 인정하여야 합니다. 설령 공평의 이념이나 신의칙을 적용해야 할 사정이 있다고 하더라도, 이과 같은 일반원칙에 근거하여 계약의 효력을 부정하거나 계약상 책임을 제한하는 것은 사적 자치의 원칙이나 법적 안정성에 대한 중대한 위협이 될 수 있으므로 신중을 기하여 극히 예외적으로 인정하여야 한다는 입장입니다.

 

, 무엇보다 계약서 문언을 가장 중시하고 신의칙이나 공평이념 등을 아주 예외적으로 극히 신중하게 적용하라는 취지입니다. 가능성을 완전히 배제하는 것은 아니지만 현실적으로 실제 사례에서 그와 같은 특별한 경우는 인정되기 어렵다는 의미입니다.

 

5. 진술 및 보증 조항 위반과 손해배상책임 범위: 대법원 2018. 7. 20. 선고 2015207044 판결

(1) M&A 계약에서 진술 및 보증 조항을 둔 목적은, 계약 종결과 이행 이후 진술 및 보증하였던 내용과 다른 사실이 발견되어 일방 당사자에게 손해가 발생한 경우에 상대방에게 그 손해를 배상하게 함으로써, 불확실한 상황에 관한 경제적 위험을 배분하고 사후에 현실화된 손해를 감안하여 매매대금을 조정할 수 있게 하기 위한 것이다.

 

(2) M&A 대상회사에 대한 소송이나 분쟁의 존재는 우발채무에 따른 손실로 이어질 가능성이 있어 진술 및 보증의 대상으로 삼는 것이다.

 

(3) 매도인이 대상회사에 대한 소송이나 분쟁을 고지하지 않았고 이후 대상회사에 실제로 우발채무가 발생한 경우 언제나 그 전부가 손해배상의 범위에 포함된다고 볼 수는 없다. 3자가 대상회사를 상대로 터무니없는 소송을 제기하였음에도 매도인이 이를 알리지 않은 상태에서 M&A 계약이 종결, 이행되었는데, 매도인에게 책임을 물을 수 있으므로 매수인으로서는 실질적 피해가 없다는 이유로 대상회사로 하여금 별다른 다툼 없이 거액의 합의금을 지급하도록 하는 경우와 같이, 매도인에게 과도한 책임을 지우는 결과를 초래할 수 있기 때문이다.

 

(4) 그러나 소송 또는 분쟁으로부터 직접 그리고 자연스럽게 도출되거나 합리적으로 예상가능한 범위의 손해에 관하여는 매도인이 그에 관한 배상책임을 부담하여야 한다.

 

(5) 매수인이 거래 종결 후 대상회사 주식을 매각하는 경우 대부분 매수인은 후속 매수인에게 진술 및 보증을 하고 그 위반으로 인한 책임을 부담하게 된다.

 

(6) 만약 매도인의 진술 및 보증 조항 위반으로 매수인의 주식 매각 이후 대상회사에 손실이 발생하고, 그로 인해 매수인이 새로운 매수인에 대하여 책임을 부담하게 되었음에도, 매수인이 주식을 매각하여 주주의 지위에 있지 않다는 이유로 당초의 매도인에게 책임을 물을 수 없는 결과에 이른다면 경제적 위험의 적정한 배분이라는 진술 및 보증 조항의 목적에 반하게 된다.

 

(7) 따라서 당사자들 사이에 특별한 합의가 없다면 매수인이 대상회사의 주식을 처분하더라도 손해배상청구 및 액수 산정에 별다른 영향을 미치지 않는다.

 

KASAN_진술보증 조항 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 관련 분쟁 - M&A 계약서 중 진술 및 보증조항 위반 및 손해배상책임 범위.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 13. 11:30
:

 

 

License 후 공동연구개발을 진행하지만 완료까지 오랜 기간이 소요되는 경우, 기술보유 licensor 벤처회사가 투자유치 또는 M&A 등으로 지배권 변동이 발생하기도 합니다. Licensee의 경쟁회사에서 licensor 회사를 M&A하는 경우는 물론, 제품라인이 중복되거나 연구개발전략이 전혀 달리하는 등 다양한 사유로 collaboration 관계를 지속하기 어려운 상황을 맞기도 합니다.

 

이와 같은 상황에 대비하여 미리 해결방안을 계약조항으로 규정해 두는 것이 바람직합니다. 다양한 쟁점이 있겠지만, 최근 올려드린 자문의 계약서 중 해당 조항을 뽑아 아래와 같이 인용합니다. 찬찬히 읽어 보고 살펴보시기 바랍니다.

 

정의 - "CHANGE IN CONTROL" shall mean, with respect to either Party, any of the following events: (i) the acquisition by any Major Pharmaceutical Company of "beneficial ownership" directly or indirectly, of 50% or more of the shares of such Party's capital stock, the holders of which have general voting power under ordinary circumstances to elect at least a majority of such Party's Board of Directors or equivalent body (the "Board of Directors") (the "Voting Stock"); (ii) the approval by the shareholders of such Party of a merger, share exchange, reorganization, consolidation or similar transaction of such Party (a "Transaction"), if any party to the transaction is a Major Pharmaceutical Company other than a Transaction which would result in the beneficial owners of Voting Stock of such Party immediately prior thereto continuing to beneficially own (either by such Voting Stock remaining outstanding or being converted into voting securities of the surviving entity) more than 50% of the Voting Stock of such Party or such surviving entity immediately after such Transaction; or (iii) approval by the shareholders of such Party of a complete liquidation of such Party or a sale or disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of such Party.

 

처리방안 계약조항 - CHANGE IN CONTROL. In the event there shall be a Change in Control with respect to either Party, the Party not involved in the Change in Control shall have a period of ninety (90) days following the Change in Control to give notice to the other Party that it desires to terminate this Agreement. If such notice is given, then the Parties shall arrange for a valuation of the value of their respective interests in this Agreement using the procedures set forth in Section 12.7(b)(i).

 

Upon receipt of the valuation, the Party not involved in the Change in Control shall have the option within thirty (30) days of receipt of the valuation either to (i) withdraw its notice terminating this Agreement or (ii) confirm its desire to terminate, in that case the Party experiencing the Change in Control shall elect either to (a) purchase the other Party's interest at the established value or (b) sell its own interest to the other Party at the appraised value of its interest. The Parties shall negotiate in good faith such other terms and conditions and take such other actions as shall be necessary to effect the sale or purchase contemplated hereby within the shortest possible time.

 

신약 기술이전 및 공동연구개발 계약

 

8.5. Change of Control.

 

8.5.1. Change of Control Notice. Astellas will notify Ironwood in writing, referencing this Section 8.5.1 of this Agreement, immediately upon any Change of Control of Astellas, and will provide such notice where possible at least 60 days prior to the Change of Control.

 

8.5.2. Consequences of a Change of Control.

 

(a) In the event that Astellas is subject to a Change of Control which could reasonably be expected to lead to an Impairment (as defined below), Astellas will notify Ironwood at least [**] days prior to the closing of such transaction, and Ironwood may elect, in its sole discretion, to (i) continue this Agreement in accordance with its terms, (ii) terminate this Agreement on [**] months notice, during which period this Agreement would continue in effect in accordance with its terms, such notice to be delivered within [**] days after the Fair Market Value is determined pursuant to this Section 8.5.2(a). Within [**] days following Ironwood’s receipt of notice from Astellas of a Change of Control that could reasonably be expected to lead to an Impairment, Ironwood will provide notice to Astellas requesting a determination of the Fair Market Value upon a termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 8.5.2(a), and the failure to so request such valuation will be deemed the election to continue this Agreement in accordance with its terms. Such determination must be made by the Parties in good faith, and if such determination is not made within [**] days of the request, then as determined by a Valuation Panel. In connection with such termination, Ironwood will be required to pay Astellas an amount equal to the upfront portion of the Fair Market Value within ten days of the effective date of the termination, and, as they become due, payment of any ongoing, and/or recurring license fees, royalties, and other payments that may be part of Fair Market Value.

 

(b) For purposes of this Section 8.5.2, an “Impairment” will only be deemed to occur if (a) it is reasonably anticipated that the entity resulting from such Change of Control will be unable to perform its obligations in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, as reasonably determined based on objective criteria available to both Parties, including without limitation, the new entity’s financial position and product pipeline, (b) the product line of the entity that survives following the Change of Control includes a product in an Oral Formulation in the Field that is in clinical development which is indicated for the treatment of IBSC, CC, OIC (unless as to any such indication, the JSC has determined not to pursue Development for such indication) or any other indication for which the Product is then being Commercialized in the Territory pursuant to this Agreement.

 

KASAN_벤처기업의 인수, 합병 시 기술이전 및 라이선스, 공동연구개발계약상 쟁점 - License, Collaboration Agreement 당사자의 M&A 등 경영권 변경사유, change of control 발생 상황에 대비한 계약조항.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 13. 10:37
:

 

 

중재합의는 법원의 재판관할을 배제하는 것입니다. 그런데 중재합의조항이 적용되는 사항과 그렇지 않은 사항이 혼재된 분쟁에 대해서는 법원의 재판관할이 있는지 문제됩니다. 그와 같은 상황에 대해 미국법원 판결이지만 국제거래계약 실무상 참고자료라고 생각되어 간략하게 소개합니다.

 

원고, licensor, Adtile사는 미국 캘리포니아 소재 s/w 개발회사, 피고 licensee Perion사는 이스라엘 소재 s/w 회사로 "Undertone"이라는 명칭으로 Motion Ads 사업을 하고 있습니다. 양사는 mobileMotion Ads s/w에 관한 License Agreement, NDA 등을 체결하고, 관련 기술과 s/w 등을 제공하였으나 사업관계 파탄으로 법적 분쟁이 발생하였습니다.

 

양사가 체결한 License Agreement에는 "Governing Law; Dispute Resolution" 조항으로 "any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement will be settled by binding arbitration"라는 명시적 규정을 두고 있습니다.

 

반면, 먼저 체결한 NDA에는 "Governing Law" 조항으로 "Any dispute arising out of this NDA shall be submitted to a state or federal court sitting in Wilmington, Delaware, which shall have the exclusive jurisdiction regarding the dispute and to whose jurisdiction the Parties irrevocably submit"라는 명시적 규정을 두고 있습니다.

 

나아가 License Agreement에 통상적 실무와 마찬가지로 "entire agreement & merger clause"로서 "this Agreement, including any exhibits and addenda, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous oral or written communications with respect hereto, all of which are merged herein"라는 명시적 규정을 두고, NDA exhibit로 첨부하였습니다.

 

이와 같은 상황에서 원고 licensor Adtile사는 피고 licensee Perion사를 상대로 license 계약위반, 저작권침해, NDA 위반, 영업비밀침해 등을 주장하는 소송을 Delaware 연방지방법원에 제기하였습니다. 위와 같은 서로 충돌하는 분쟁해결조항에 대해, 원고 Adtile사에서는 비록 License 계약위반 사안은 중재합의조항을 적용해야 하지만, 나머지 사안들은 중재가 아니라 법원재판으로 해결되어야 할 것이므로, 결국 본 분쟁사건 전체를 중재절차가 아니라 법원의 재판을 통해 해결되어야 한다고 주장합니다.

 

licensor Adtile사 입장에서는 단순히 계약위반 주장에 그치지 않고 자신이 개발한 기술정보가 licensee측에서 무단 사용됨으로써 영업비밀침해, 기술탈취, NDA 위반 등에 관한 권리보호를 긴급하게 받기를 희망할 것입니다. 이와 같이 여러 가지 쟁점이 혼재된 복잡한 분쟁에 대해서는 중재절차보다 법원재판이 유리하다고 판단했을 것입니다. 그러나 미국법원 판결에서 보듯 융단 폭격하듯 주장 가능한 모든 청구원인을 주장하는 것은 실익이 별로 없습니다. 결과는 중재 합의 사항이 해결되기 전에는 다른 사안에 대한 재판을 중지한다는 것이므로 licensor Adtile사 입장에서는 특별한 효과를 거두지 얻지 못한 것입니다.

 

위 사건에서 미국법원은 전체 소송절차를 중지하기로 결정하였습니다. 판결에서 제시한 근거법령은 다음과 같습니다. "District courts shall stay proceedings while arbitration is pending if a suit is brought "upon any issue referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for such arbitration" and the court is "satisfied that the issue involved in such suit or proceeding is referable to arbitration under such an agreement ...."

 

즉 중재합의가 포함된 분쟁사안과 중재합의 적용범위를 벗어난 분쟁사안을 결합되어 있는 소송에 대해 미국법원은 제기된 소송심리를 중지합니다. 소송초반에 중재합의를 이유로 소를 각하하지 않고 일단 소송을 중지한 후 중재절차가 완료된 다음, 다시 소송심리를 진행하여 소 각하 및 본안심리 여부를 결정한다는 취지로 보입니다.

 

KASAN_라이선스 계약서에 중재(arbitration) 합의조항 포함 sw License 계약분쟁 및 영업비밀침해 분쟁 소송관할 합의조항 포함 NDA 계약분쟁 등이 결합된 소송의 법원의 재판관할 판단 – 미국법원.pdf

 

  [질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 13. 09:09
:

 

 

유전자 치료제 공동개발 계약서 중의 중재조항 122

 

 

중재법 규정 중재합의 대상에 대한  민사소송 부적법, 소각하 대상

중재법 제8(중재합의의 방식) ① 중재합의는 독립된 합의 또는 계약에 중재조항을 포함하는 형식으로 할 수 있다. ② 중재합의는 서면으로 하여야 한다.

③ 다음 각 호의 어느 하나에 해당하는 경우는 서면에 의한 중재합의로 본다. <개정 2016. 5. 29.>

1. 구두나 행위, 그 밖의 어떠한 수단에 의하여 이루어진 것인지 여부와 관계없이 중재합의의 내용이 기록된 경우

2. 전보, 전신, 팩스, 전자우편 또는 그 밖의 통신수단에 의하여 교환된 전자적 의사표시에 중재합의가 포함된 경우. 다만, 그 중재합의의 내용을 확인할 수 없는 경우는 제외한다.

3. 어느 한쪽 당사자가 당사자 간에 교환된 신청서 또는 답변서의 내용에 중재합의가 있는 것을 주장하고 상대방 당사자가 이에 대하여 다투지 아니하는 경우

④ 계약이 중재조항을 포함한 문서를 인용하고 있는 경우에는 중재합의가 있는 것으로 본다. 다만, 중재조항을 그 계약의 일부로 하고 있는 경우로 한정한다. <개정 2016. 5. 29.>

 

중재법 제9(중재합의와 법원에의 제소) 중재합의의 대상인 분쟁에 관하여 소가 제기된 경우에 피고가 중재합의가 있다는 항변을 하였을 때에는 법원은 그 소를 각하하여야 한다. 다만, 중재합의가 없거나 무효이거나 효력을 상실하였거나 그 이행이 불가능한 경우에는 그러하지 아니하다. ② 피고는 제1항의 항변을 본안에 관한 최초의 변론을 할 때까지 하여야 한다. ③ 제1항의 소가 법원에 계속 중인 경우에도 중재판정부는 중재절차를 개시 또는 진행하거나 중재판정을 내릴 수 있다.

 

원고회사 라이센시의 주장 요지

(1)   민사소송으로 청구하는 내용 - 라이선스 계약 대상 특허권, 특허출원의 지분 1/2 명의이전청구, 연구개발 결과물 마스터세포은행 (Master Cell Bank, MCB) + 제조용 세포은행 (Working Cell bank, WCB)1/2 지분 소유권 확인청구, 연구개발 결과 데이터 및 자료의 제공(인도) 청구

(2)   중재조항에도 불구하고 민사소송 제기할 수 있는 사안으로 주장   

 

피고회사 라이센서의 주장 요지

(1)   계약관련 모든 분쟁을 대한상사중재원의 중재로 해결하기로 합의함, 민사소송은 중재합의를 위반하여 제기된 부적법한 소로 각하해야 함

 

서울중앙지방법원 판결 요지 중재합의 위반 소로 부적법함 소 각하 판결

 

판단기준 법리 대법원 2011. 12. 22. 선고 201076573 판결

장래의 분쟁을 중재에 의하여 해결하겠다는 중재합의가 있는 것으로 인정되는 경우, 중재합의의 대상인 분쟁의 범위를 명확하게 특정하여 한정하였다는 등의 특별한 사정이 없는 한 당사자들 사이의 특정한 법률관계에서 비롯되는 모든 분쟁을 중재에 의하여 해결하기로 정한 것으로 봄이 상당하다(대법원 2007. 5. 31. 선고 200574344 판결 참조).

 

대법원 판결 사건의 원심판결 요지 - ① 이 사건 각 도급계약서 제111조 제1항은 중재합의의 대상이 되는 분쟁으로사실관계에 대한 이견 기타 분쟁을 규정하고 있고, 같은 조 제4항에서는 중재인이 일정한 순서(1. 계약문서 표현의 문자상 의미, 2. 계약문서 전체 규정에 비추어 합리적으로 나타나는 계약당사자의 의도, 3. 중재에 진행되는 시점에 유효한 대한민국 법률)에 따라 본 계약의 제 조건을 해석하거나 당사자의 권리·의무 또는 책임을 정하도록 규정하고 있어 중재합의의 기본규정인 제111조 자체에서 이미 사실관계뿐만 아니라 계약이나 관련 법률의 해석도 중재의 대상임을 전제하고 있으며, 더욱이 제17조는본 계약에서 정하지 아니한 사항 또는 계약문서의 내용 중 불명확한 사항 등이 있거나 그 해석에 관하여 당사자 사이에 차이가 있는 경우, 발주자가 합리적으로 해석하거나 보충하고, 계약상대자가 이에 대해 이견이 있어도111조의 중재판정이 달리 판단할 때까지발주자의 해석 또는 보충에 따른다.”고 규정하고 있는데 이 제17조 역시 계약의 해석에 관한 사항도 중재의 대상임을 당연한 전제로 하고 있음이 분명하므로, 이 사건 각 도급계약에서의 중재조항은 그 도급계약서의 문리해석상 사실관계에 대한 분쟁뿐만 아니라 계약해석이나 법률문제에 관한 분쟁도 그 대상으로 하고 있다고 보기에 충분하고, ② 어떤 법률관계상의 분쟁에서 사실문제, 계약해석문제, 법률문제는 유기적으로 관련을 맺고 있는 것이고, 사실관계의 확정은 분쟁해결을 위한 재판의 전제가 되는 한 요소일 뿐이어서 사실관계의 확정만으로 분쟁을 해결할 수 없는 것인데, 중재인이 사실관계에 관하여만 판정을 하도록 한다면 결국 법원이 중재판정을 전제로 다시 재판을 할 수밖에 없게 되는 것이어서, 이는 중재에 의하여 사법상의 분쟁을 적정·공평·신속하게 해결하고자 하는 중재법의 목적과 중재법이 정한 경우를 제외하고는 법원이 중재에 관여할 수 없도록 한 중재법 제6조의 취지에 반하는 결과를 초래하며, ③ 중재란 본래 법원의 재판으로 해결하여야 할 분쟁을 당사자 사이의 합의로 법원이 아닌 중재인의 판정에 의해 해결하고자 하는 제도인 만큼, 중재의 대상은 법원의 재판권이 미칠 수 있는 사항인 법률상의 분쟁을 의미하는 점, 중재의 경우 중재인은 분쟁의 대상에 대한 사실문제, 법률문제 등 모든 것에 대하여 판정할 수 있는 점에서 사실문제만을 판단의 대상으로 할 수 있는 중재감정과 구별되는 점, 원고의 주장대로사실관계만이 중재의 대상이라고 한다면 이에 대한 중재판정의 집행을 쉽게 상정할 수 없는 점 등을 더하여 보면, 이 사건 각 도급계약상 중재조항은 계약해석이나 법률문제에 대한 분쟁도 중재의 대상으로 한 것으로 보아야 한다.

 

대법원 판단요지 - 이 사건 각 도급계약서의 중재 관련 조항들이 중재합의의 대상을사실관계에 대한 분쟁에 한정하는 것으로 명확하게 특정하고 있다고 볼 수 없으므로, 위 중재 관련 조항들은 이 사건 각 도급계약으로부터 비롯되는 모든 분쟁을 중재에 의하여 해결하기로 정한 것으로 봄이 상당하다.

 

분쟁사안애서 법원의 구체적 판단 이유

 

첨부: 서울중앙지방법원 2018. 5. 18. 선고 2017가합570338 판결

서울중앙지방법원 2018. 5. 18. 선고 2017가합570338 판결_바이로메드.pdf

KASAN_바이오 벤처회사와 제약회사 사이 유전자 치료제 신약공동개발 및 라이선스 계약서에서 분쟁해결 방안 중재조항의 적용범위 판단 서울 서울중앙지방법원 2018. 5. 18. 선고 2017가합570338 .pdf

  [질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 13. 08:52
:


 

14. TERM AND TERMINATION. 


14.1 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue in effect until it is terminated as specifically provided in this Agreement. 


14.2 Termination for Material Breach. 

(a) If either Party (the “non-breaching Party”) believes the other Party (the “alleged breaching party”) is in material breach of any of such alleged breaching Party’s obligations under this Agreement, the non-breaching Party may give notice of such breach to the alleged breaching Party, and the alleged breaching Party shall have sixty (60) days in which to remedy such material breach or establish that it is not in material breach hereunder. Subject to Section 14.2(b), if such alleged material breach is not remedied in the time period set forth above, the non-breaching Party shall be entitled, without prejudice to any of its other rights conferred on it by this Agreement, and in addition to any other remedies available to it by law or in equity, to terminate this Agreement upon written notice to the alleged breaching Party.  


(b) If the alleged breaching Party disputes in good faith the existence or materiality of a breach specified in a notice provided by the non-breaching Party pursuant to Section 14.2(a), and the alleged breaching Party provides notice to the non-breaching Party of such dispute within fifteen (15) days after receipt of such notice, the non-breaching Party shall not have the right to terminate this Agreement unless and until the existence of such material breach by the alleged breaching Party has been determined in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures set forth in Section 15.8 (each such termination delay, a “Toll Period”) and the breaching Party fails to cure such default within sixty (60) days following such determination; provided that, if it is determined that such material breach occurred and such breach is not cured within such sixty (60) day period, then, for  purposes of Section 14.4(c)(iii), this Agreement shall be deemed to have been terminated as of the date of delivery of notice of such breach under Section 14.2(a). During the pendency of such a dispute, all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall remain in effect and the Parties shall continue to perform all of their respective obligations hereunder.  


14.3 Termination upon Insolvency. To the extent permitted under Applicable Laws, either Party may terminate this Agreement with respect to the other Party if, at any time, such other Party shall file in any court or agency pursuant to any statute or regulation of any state or country, a petition in bankruptcy or insolvency or for reorganization or for an arrangement or for the appointment of a receiver or trustee of such other Party or of its assets, or if such other Party proposes a written agreement of composition or extension of its debts, or if such other Party shall be served with an involuntary petition against it, filed in any insolvency proceeding, and such petition shall not be dismissed within forty-five (45) days after the filing thereof, or if such other Party shall propose or be a party to any dissolution or liquidation, or if such other Party shall make an assignment for the benefit of its creditors.   


14.4 Termination upon Force Majeure. Either Party may terminate this agreement due to a Force Majeure event pursuant to Section 15.13.   


14.5 Consequences of Expiration or Termination. 

(a) Upon termination of this Agreement by either Party pursuant to Sections 14.2, 14.3, or 14.4, 


(i) all of the licenses granted by Licensor to Licensee shall therewith immediately terminate and any sublicenses granted by Licensee thereunder will be subject to the provisions set forth in Section 2.4(f); 


(ii) Licensee must assign and transfer to Licensor, and shall cause its Affiliates and Sublicensees to assign and transfer to Licensor, without additional compensation, all of their right, title, and interest in to, and under, subject to any licenses or sublicenses granted by Licensee that expressly survive any such termination pursuant to Section 2.4(f), all clinical and related study data based on use of Products, all Regulatory Filings and Regulatory Approvals for Products in respect of each country in the Territory; and the Renaissance Supply Agreements. 


(b) If at the time of any such termination of this Agreement by Licensor pursuant to Sections 14.2 or 14.3 Licensee has in its possession or under its control any inventory of the Product approved and allocated for sale in the Territory, Licensee shall for a period not to exceed six (6) months following the effective date of such termination be permitted to sell any such inventory of the Product in the Field in the Territory, and the licenses hereunder shall continue on a nonexclusive basis until all such units of the Product have been sold, provided that (A) the Product shall not be sold at a discount to a purchaser that is greater than the average discount provided to such purchaser for the Product during the twelve (12) month period preceding such termination and, in addition, such sales shall not result in the applicable wholesaler inventory levels for the Product exceeding the average levels for the twelve (12) month period preceding such termination, and (B) Licensee continues to pay, during the applicable Royalty Term, the applicable royalty and, if applicable, sales milestones, on resulting applicable Net Sales of Product in the Territory by it Licensee, its Sublicensees or any Third Party Distributors. 


(c) In the event of a material breach of this Agreement by Licensor that is not successfully disputed or cured by Licensor in accordance with Section 14.2(b), Licensee may elect to terminate this Agreement or continue the Agreement; provided, that in the event Licensee elects to continue the Agreement in lieu of terminating the Agreement in accordance with Section 14.2, Licensee will have the right in its discretion to fully reduce the royalty payments or milestone payments required under Article 8 by the amount of damages suffered by Licensee due to such material breach by Licensor, which such amount will be determined by an independent third party with requisite expertise and agreed upon by the Parties, with any dispute as to the determination being subject to the dispute resolution process set forth in Section 15.8(b). 


(d) In the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of Licensor that gives rise to Licensee’s right to terminate this Agreement in accordance with Section 14.3, Licensee may elect to terminate this Agreement or continue the Agreement (subject, to the extent applicable, Section 14.7). 


14.6 General Surviving Obligations. The rights and obligations set forth in this Agreement shall extend beyond the expiration or termination of the Agreement only to the extent expressly provided for herein, or to the extent that the survival of such rights or obligations are necessary to permit their complete fulfillment or discharge. Expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason shall not (a) release either Party from any obligation that has accrued prior to the effective date of such expiration or termination (including without limitation the obligation to pay amounts accrued and due under this Agreement prior to the effective date of such termination but that are unpaid or become payable thereafter), (b) preclude either Party from claiming any other damages, compensation, or relief that it may be entitled to upon such expiration or termination, or (c) terminate any right to obtain performance of any obligation provided for in this Agreement that shall survive expiration or termination. Without limiting the foregoing, the Parties have identified various rights and obligations which are understood to survive, as follows. In the event of expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason, the following provisions shall survive in addition to others specified in this Agreement to survive in such event: Sections 7.7, 7.8, 9.1(a), 9.2(b), 9.5(a), and Articles 1 (to the extent that any term defined therein is used in any of the sections or articles specified in this list as surviving termination of this Agreement), 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. 


14.7 Rights in Bankruptcy. All rights and licenses granted under or pursuant to this Agreement by either Party are, and shall otherwise be deemed to be, for purposes of Section 365(n) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, licenses of right to “intellectual property” as defined under Section 61 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The Parties agree that the Parties, as licensees of such rights under this Agreement, shall retain and may fully exercise all of their rights and elections under the United States Bankruptcy Code. The Parties further agree that, in the event of the commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding by or against either Party under the United States Bankruptcy Code, the other Party will be entitled to a complete duplicate of (or complete access to, as appropriate) any such intellectual property and all embodiments of such intellectual property, which, if not already in the non-subject Party’s possession, shall be promptly delivered to it (a) upon any such commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding upon the non-subject Party’s written request therefor, unless the Party subject to such proceeding elects to continue to perform all of its obligations under this Agreement, or (b) if not delivered under clause (a) above, following the rejection of this Agreement by or on behalf of the Party subject to such proceeding upon written request therefor by the non-subject Party. 

 

KASAN_국제계약서 중에서 기술이전 및 독점라이선스 계약서 중 기간, 계약위반 등으로 인한 계약종료, 계약종료 후 처리 등 TERM AND TERMINATION 조항 샘플.pdf

 

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]


 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 15:30
:

 

16. GRANT OF RIGHTS. 

 

16.1 License Grants from CyDex to Hospira.

(a) Licensed Patents. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CyDex hereby grants to Hospira a world-wide, nontransferable (except with respect to the assignment provision in Section 12.13), sublicensable, [*] during the Term under the Licensed Patents, solely to [*] the Finished Product in the Territory. For the duration of the Exclusivity Period, such license shall be exclusive even as to CyDex and its Affiliates; after the expiration of the Exclusivity Period, such license shall be non-exclusive. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that any Licensed Patents are licensed to CyDex or its Affiliates by a Third Party on a non-exclusive basis, Hospira acknowledges that the license granted to Hospira in this Section 2.1(a) to any such Licensed Patents shall during the Exclusivity Period be exclusive as to CyDex and its Affiliates and non-exclusive as to any Third Party licensee who obtained a license to any such Licensed Patents other than from CyDex or any of its Affiliates or any of their sublicensees. Hospira may not sublicense the Licensed Patents, except as expressly set forth in Section 2.2 and Section 2.3 below.

 

(b) Other Intellectual Property License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CyDex hereby grants to Hospira a world-wide, nontransferable (except with respect to the assignment provision in Section 12.13), sublicensable, [*] during the Term to all other CyDex Intellectual Property, including, without limitation, to CyDex’s rights in and to the Captisol Data Package, solely to [*] the Finished Product in the Territory. For the duration of the Exclusivity Period, such license shall be exclusive even as to CyDex and its Affiliates; after the expiration of the Exclusivity Period, such license shall be non-exclusive. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that any contents of the Captisol Data Package are licensed to CyDex or its Affiliates by a Third Party on a non-exclusive basis, the license granted to Hospira in this Section 2.1(b) to any such contents of the Captisol Data Package shall during the Exclusivity Period be exclusive as to CyDex and its Affiliates and non-exclusive as to any Third Party licensee who obtained a license to any such contents of the Captisol Data Package other than from CyDex or any of its Affiliates or any of their sublicensees. Hospira may not sublicense its rights to the Captisol Data Package, except as expressly set forth in Section 2.2 and Section 2.3 below.

 

(c) Scope of Licenses. CyDex grants no licenses or rights to use other than as expressly set forth herein. Hospira agrees not to use Captisol supplied hereunder other than as expressly set forth herein. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, CyDex grants no rights to Hospira to manufacture, import, sell or offer for sale bulk Captisol.

 

(d) Bankruptcy Code. All rights and licenses granted under or pursuant to this Agreement by CyDex to Hospira are, and shall otherwise be deemed to be, for purposes of Section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code, licenses of rights to “intellectual property” as defined under Section 101 of the Bankruptcy Code. The parties agree that Hospira, as a licensee of such rights under this Agreement, shall retain and may fully exercise all of its rights and elections under the Bankruptcy Code.

 

(e) Disclosure of and Compliance with Licenses. Exhibit C sets forth a list of all licenses under which, pursuant to Section 2.1, Hospira is granted a sub-license by CyDex and/or its Affiliates. If CyDex or any of its Affiliates enters into any future license agreements under which, pursuant to Section 2.1, Hospira is granted a sub-license by CyDex and/or its Affiliates, CyDex will promptly disclose such license agreements to Hospira. CyDex shall comply and shall cause its Affiliates to comply with the provisions of all such licenses, including without limitation all such licensing provisions of the [*].

 

16.2 Sublicensing. Hospira shall have the right to grant sublicenses to any Third Party (collectively “Sublicensees”) under the licenses granted to Hospira pursuant to Section 2.1; [*]

 

16.3 Contracting. Hospira and any of its Affiliates may manufacture the Finished Product (but, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, not the bulk Captisol if the manufacture of bulk Captisol would be Covered by a Licensed Patent for which there is a Valid Claim or if such manufacture would require a license to CyDex Intellectual Property) or contract the manufacture of the Finished Product (but, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, not the manufacture of bulk Captisol if the manufacture of bulk Captisol would be Covered by a Licensed Patent for which there is a Valid Claim or if such manufacture would require a license to CyDex Intellectual Property) with any Third Party manufacturers selected by Hospira (each a “Contract Manufacturer”). To the extent necessary to engage a Contract Manufacturer for the Finished Product, Hospira shall be permitted under this Agreement to grant any such Contract Manufacturer a sublicense under the licenses granted to Hospira pursuant to Section 2.1; provided that Hospira shall comply with the requirements of Section 2.2. For the sake of clarity, Hospira, its Affiliates and any of their Contract Manufacturers may at all times manufacture [***] provided that the manufacture of such [*] is not Covered by a Licensed Patent for which there is a Valid Claim and such manufacture would not require a license to CyDex Intellectual Property.

 

16.4 Negative Covenants by CyDex.

(a) During the Exclusivity Period, neither CyDex nor any of its Affiliates shall directly themselves, or grant any Third Party any right or license to any of the CyDex Intellectual Property to research, develop, modify, make, have made, import, export, use, promote, market, distribute, package, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise commercially exploit the Finished Product or any Competing Product.

 

(b) During the Exclusivity Period, neither CyDex nor any of its Affiliates shall themselves nor provide any Third Party any assistance whatsoever to [*].

 

(c) During the Exclusivity Period, neither CyDex nor any of its Affiliates shall supply Captisol to any Third Party other than a Hospira designee to utilize Captisol to [*] the Finished Product or any Competing Product. If during the Exclusivity Period any such Third Party, or any other Third Party that acquires any Captisol, commences to [*] the Finished Product or any Competing Product, CyDex must immediately cease and cause its Affiliates and any other Third Parties to immediately cease supplying Captisol to the offending Third Party for the duration of the Exclusivity Period or until (if sooner) assurances reasonably satisfactory to Hospira that the infringing use has ended and will not resume have been obtained.

 

16.6 Negative Covenants by Hospira.

(a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Hospira agrees not to [*] any Finished Product or Captisol in [*].

 

(b) Hospira covenants and agrees that it and its Affiliates, Sublicensees and Contract Manufacturers shall not re-sell any Captisol purchased pursuant to this Agreement (except as incorporated into the Finished Product), and shall not use any Captisol purchased pursuant to this Agreement except in connection with the Finished Product.

 

(c) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Hospira shall only have a license or right to use or reference CyDex’s DMF/CEP in conjunction with Captisol supplied by CyDex or manufactured by Hospira or any Hospira designee pursuant to Section 3.6.

 

KASAN_제약회사의 신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중 독점 LICENSE 부여 및 독점권 보장 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 14:30
:

 

23. INDEMNIFICATION; INSURANCE; LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. 

 

23.1 General Indemnification by CyDex. CyDex shall defend, indemnify and hold Hospira and its Affiliates and Sublicensees, and each of their respective directors, officers, agents and employees, harmless from and against any and all losses, judgments, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses (including the reasonable costs and expenses of attorneys and other professionals) (collectively “Losses”) incurred as a result of any claim, demand, action or other proceeding (each, a “Claim”) by a Third Party, to the extent such Losses arise out of: (a) the manufacture, use, handling, promotion, marketing, distribution, importation, sale or offering for sale of Captisol by CyDex, its Affiliates or any of their agents, or (b) CyDex’s breach of this Agreement, including without limitation any of its representations and warranties set forth in Section 8, or (c) any negligent or willful misconduct by CyDex or its Affiliates or any of their respective distributors, officers, directors employees or agents, in each case to the extent that such Losses are not due to Hospira’s or any of its Affiliates’ or Sublicensees’, or any of their respective directors’, officers’, agents’ or employees’ breach of this Agreement or negligence or willful misconduct.

 

23.2 General Indemnification by Hospira. Hospira shall defend, indemnify and hold CyDex and its Affiliates, and each of their respective directors, officers, agents and employees, harmless from and against any and all Losses incurred as a result of any Claim by a Third Party, to the extent such Losses arise out of: (a) the manufacture, use, handling, promotion, marketing, distribution, importation, sale or offering for sale of the Finished Product by Hospira, its Affiliates and Sublicensees, or (b) Hospira’s breach of this Agreement, including without limitation any of its representations and warranties set forth in Section 8, or (c) any negligent or willful misconduct by Hospira or its Affiliates or any of their respective distributors, officers, directors employees or agents, in each case to the extent that such Losses are not due to CyDex’s or any of its Affiliates’ or any of their respective directors’, officers’, agents’ or employees’ breach of this Agreement or negligence or willful misconduct.

 

23.4 Procedure.

 

(a) The person intending to claim indemnification under Section 9 (an “Indemnified Party”) shall promptly notify the other party (the “Indemnifying Party”) of any Claim in respect of which the Indemnified Party intends to claim such indemnification, and a reasonable explanation of the basis for the Claim and the amount of alleged Losses to the extent of the facts then known by the Indemnified Party. (Notwithstanding the foregoing, no delay or deficiency on the part of the Indemnified Party in so notifying the Indemnifying Party will relieve the Indemnifying Party of any liability or obligation under this Agreement except to the extent the Indemnifying Party has suffered actual prejudice directly caused by the delay or other deficiency.) The Indemnifying Party shall assume the defense thereof; provided, however, that if the Indemnifying Party assumes the defense, the Indemnified Party shall have the right to employ counsel separate from counsel employed by the Indemnifying Party in any such action and to participate in the defense thereof, but the fees and expenses of such counsel employed by the Indemnified Party shall be at the sole cost and expense of the Indemnified Party unless the Indemnifying Party consents to the retention of such counsel or unless the named parties to any action or proceeding include both the Indemnifying Party and the Indemnified Party and a representation of both the Indemnifying Party and the Indemnified Party by the same counsel would be inappropriate due to the actual or potential differing interests between them. And provided further that, if the Indemnifying Party shall fail to assume the defense of and reasonably defend such Claim, the Indemnified Party shall have the right to retain or assume control of such defense and the Indemnifying Party shall pay (as incurred and on demand) the fees and expenses of counsel retained by the Indemnified Party.

 

(b) The Indemnifying Party shall not be liable for the indemnification of any Claim settled (or resolved by consent to the entry of judgment) without the written consent of the Indemnifying Party (which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed). Also, if the Indemnifying Party shall control the defense of any such Claim, the Indemnifying Party shall have the right to settle such Claim; provided, that the Indemnifying Party shall obtain the prior written consent (which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed) of the Indemnified Party before entering into any settlement of (or resolving by consent to the entry of judgment upon) such Claim unless (A) there is no finding or admission of any violation of law or any violation of the rights of any Third Party by an Indemnified Party, no requirement that the Indemnified Party admit fault or culpability, and no adverse effect on any other claims that may be made by or against the Indemnified Party and (B) the sole relief provided is monetary damages that are paid in full by the Indemnifying Party and such settlement does not require the Indemnified Party to take (or refrain from taking) any action.

 

(c) Regardless of who controls the defense, the other party hereto shall reasonably cooperate in the defense as may be requested. Without limitation, the Indemnified Party, and its directors, officers, advisers, agents and employees, shall reasonably cooperate with the Indemnifying Party and its legal representatives in the investigations of any Claim.

 

23.5 Insurance. CyDex will procure and maintain, at its own expense, for the duration of the Agreement, and for [*] thereafter if written on a claims made or occurrence reported form, the types of insurance specified below with carriers rated [*]. Best or like rating agencies:

  a. Workers’ Compensation accordance with applicable statutory requirements and shall provide a waiver of subrogation in favor of Hospira; 

  b. Employer’s Liability with a limit of liability in an amount of not less than $[***]; 

  c. Commercial General Liability including premises operations, products & completed operations, blanket contractual liability, personal injury including fire legal liability for bodily injury and property damage in an amount not less than $[***]; 

  d. Commercial Automobile Liability for owned, hired and non-owned motor vehicles with a combined single limit in an amount not less than $[*]; 

  e. Excess Liability including product liability with a combined single limit in an amount of not less than $[*]; 

  f. Commercial Crime or Fidelity Bond in an amount of not less than $[*] including an endorsement for Third Party liability without the requirement of a conviction. 

  g. Cargo Legal Liability insurance covering all risks of physical loss or damage to cargo handled by CyDex. The limit of liability shall not be less than $[*]. 

 

23.6 Limitation of Liability. EXCEPT FOR (1) PERSONAL INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH, (2) TANGIBLE PROPERTY DAMAGE, (3) EACH PARTY’S INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS, (4) DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF AN INTENTIONAL BREACH OF THE CONFIDENTIALITY OBLIGATIONS HEREIN, (5) DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF CYDEX’S BREACH OF SECTION 2.4, AND (6) DAMAGES FOR WHICH CYDEX IS RESPONSIBLE PURSUANT SECTION 3.6, 3.7 OR 6.4.

 

KASAN_신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 국제계약서 중에서 면책조항 INDEMNIFICATION, INSURANCE, LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 13:47
:

 

22. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES. 


22.1 Mutual Representations and Warranties. Each party represents and warrants to the other (as of the Effective Date) as follows:


(a) it is a corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the state or country of its incorporation;


(b) it has the complete and unrestricted power and right to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder;


(c) this Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by such party and constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of such party enforceable against such party in accordance with its terms except as enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, receivership, moratorium, fraudulent transfer, or other similar laws affecting the rights and remedies of creditors generally and by general principles of equity;


(d) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by such party does not conflict with any agreement, instrument or understanding, oral or written, to which such party is a party or by which such party may be bound, nor violate any law or regulation of any court, governmental body or administrative or other agency having authority over such party; without limiting the warranties in this Section,


(e) all consents, approvals and authorizations from all governmental authorities or other third parties required to be obtained by such party in connection with the execution and delivery of this Agreement have been obtained;


(f) no person or entity has or will have, as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, any right, interest or valid claim against or upon such party for any commission, fee or other compensation as a finder or broker because of any act by such party or its agents; and


(g) it has not entered into any agreement with any Third Party that is in conflict with the rights granted to the other party pursuant to this Agreement;


(h) there are no suits, claims, or proceedings pending, or to its best knowledge and belief, after due inquiry, threatened against it or any of its Affiliates in any court or by or before any governmental body or agency which would affect its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement.


22.2 Captisol Warranties. CyDex warrants that the Captisol delivered hereunder shall:


(a) at the time of delivery and until the applicable Captisol expiration date be in compliance with and meet any and all specifications as set out in the DMF/CEP as referenced in the Regulatory Filings and Regulatory Approvals and in compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices.


(b) at the time of delivery and until the applicable Captisol expiration date be free from defects in materials and manufacture and shall continue to conform to the Specifications.


(c) have been manufactured in accordance with the DMF/CEP and in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances and regulations of the FDA and any other then applicable Major-Market national, supra-national and United States Regulatory Authorities, including without limitation, the Act and Good Manufacturing Practices.


(d) not, when delivered, be adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of the Act or any similar laws or regulations of applicable Major-Market national, supra-national and United States Regulatory Authorities or be an article which may not, under provisions of any applicable Major-Market national, supra-national or United States law, be sold by CyDex to Hospira.


(e) at the time of delivery have at least [*]% of its original shelf life.


(f) at the time of delivery be free and clear of all liens, claims, charges and encumbrances and that CyDex shall have title to the Captisol.


22.4 Reference Standard Warranty. CyDex further warrants that any reference standard material delivered to Hospira pursuant to this Agreement shall meet the specifications outlined in the applicable Certificate of Analysis provided pursuant to Section 3.7.


22.6 No Debarred Service Providers. CyDex represents and warrants that to neither CyDex, nor any of its Affiliates, employees or agents working on Hospira’s behalf, has ever been, is currently, or is the subject of a proceeding that could lead to that party becoming, as applicable, a Debarred Entity or Individual. CyDex further covenants, represents and warrants that if, during the Term of this Agreement, it, or any of its Affiliates, employees or agents working on Hospira’s behalf, becomes or is the subject of any FDA investigation or debarment proceeding that could lead to that party becoming, as applicable, a Debarred Entity or Individual, CyDex shall immediately notify Hospira, and Hospira shall have the right to immediately terminate this Agreement. This provision shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement. For purposes of this provision, the following definitions shall apply:


(a) A “Debarred Individual” is an individual who has been debarred by the FDA pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §335a (a) or (b) from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug Captisol application.


(b) A “Debarred Entity” is a corporation, partnership or association that has been debarred by the FDA pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §335a (a) or (b) from submitting or assisting in the submission of any abbreviated drug application, or a subsidiary or Affiliate of a Debarred Entity.


22.7 No-Conflict by CyDex. CyDex also represents and warrants that the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement does not conflict with any of the [*]; and that CyDex has the right to grant Hospira the licenses set forth herein to all CyDex Intellectual Property, including, without limitation, the Licensed Patents.


22.8 Disclaimer. THE WARRANTIES SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 8 ARE PROVIDED IN LIEU OF, AND EACH PARTY HEREBY DISCLAIMS, ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS AND IMPLIED, RELATING TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT, CAPTISOL, THE LICENSED PATENTS OR THE CAPTISOL DATA PACKAGE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS.

 

KASAN_제약회사 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중에서 진술 및 보증조항 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 12:00
:

 

21. CONFIDENTIALITY. 

 

21.1 Definition. Hospira and CyDex each recognizes that, during the Term, it may be necessary for a party (the “Disclosing Party”) to provide Confidential Information (as defined herein) to the other party (the “Receiving Party”) that is highly valuable, the disclosure of which would be highly prejudicial to such party. The disclosure and use of Confidential Information will be governed by the provisions of this Section 7. Neither Hospira nor CyDex shall use the other’s Confidential Information except as expressly permitted in this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, “Confidential Information” means all information disclosed by the Disclosing Party to the Receiving Party in any form whatsoever, including but not limited to product specifications, data, know-how, formulations, product concepts, sample materials, business and technical information, financial data, batch records, trade secrets, processes, techniques, algorithms, programs, designs, drawings, and any other information related to a party’s present or future products, sales, suppliers, customers, employees, investors or business. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, CyDex’s Confidential Information includes all materials provided as part of the Captisol Data Package.

 

21.2 Obligation. CyDex and Hospira agree that they will disclose the other’s Confidential Information to its (or its respective Affiliates’) own officers, employees, consultants and agents only if and to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out their respective responsibilities under this Agreement or in accordance with the exercise of their rights under this Agreement, and such disclosure shall be limited to the extent reasonably possible consistent with such responsibilities and rights. Except as provided in the previous sentence, neither party shall disclose Confidential Information of the other to any Third Party without the other’s prior written consent. Any disclosure to a Third Party shall be pursuant to the terms of a non-disclosure agreement substantially similar to the requirements of this Section 7. The party which disclosed Confidential Information of the other to any Third Party shall be responsible and liable for any disclosure or use by such Third Party (or its disclosees) which would have violated this Agreement if committed by the party itself. Neither party shall use Confidential Information of the other except as expressly allowed by and for the purposes of this Agreement. Each party shall take such action to preserve the confidentiality of each other’s Confidential Information as it would customarily take to preserve the confidentiality of its own Confidential Information (but in no event less than a reasonable standard of care). Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement and subject to terms and conditions in this Agreement, if so requested by the other party a party shall promptly return all relevant records and materials in its possession or control containing or embodying the other party’s Confidential Information (including all copies and extracts of documents); provided, however, that each party may retain one archival copy (and such electronic copies that exist as part of the party’s computer systems, network storage systems and electronic backup systems) of such records and materials solely to be able to monitor its obligations that survive under this Agreement.

 

21.3 Exceptions. The use and non-disclosure obligations set forth in this Section 7 shall not apply to any Confidential Information, or portion thereof, that the Receiving Party can demonstrate by appropriate documentation:

(a) at the time of disclosure is in the public domain;

(b) after disclosure, becomes part of the public domain, by publication or otherwise, through no fault of the Receiving Party or its disclosees;

(c) is independently developed by Receiving Party personnel with no reference or access to the Confidential Information; or

(d) is made available to the Receiving Party by an independent third party without obligation of confidentiality, provided, however, that to the Receiving Party’s knowledge, such information was not obtained by said third party, directly or indirectly, from the Disclosing Party hereunder.

 

In addition, the Receiving Party may disclose information to a court or ADR forum in the process of seeking to enforce through such court or ADR forum its own rights under this Agreement, and also may disclose information that is required to be disclosed by law, by a valid order of a court or by order or regulation of a governmental agency including but not limited to, regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or in the course of litigation, provided that in all cases the Receiving Party shall give the other party prompt notice of the pending disclosure and make a reasonable effort to obtain, or to assist the Disclosing Party in obtaining, a protective order or confidential-treatment order preventing or limiting (to the greatest possible extent and for the longest possible period) the disclosure and/or requiring that the Confidential Information so disclosed be used only for the purposes for which the law or regulation required, or for which the order was issued.

 

21.4 Injunction. Each party agrees that should it breach or threaten to breach any provisions of this Section 7, the Disclosing Party will suffer irreparable damages and its remedy at law will be inadequate. Upon any breach or threatened breach by the Receiving Party of this Section 7, the Disclosing Party shall be entitled to seek from any court of competent jurisdiction temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunctive relief in addition to any other remedy which it may have, without need to post any bond or security, in addition to any and all other legal and equitable rights and remedies available to the Disclosing Party.

 

21.5 Public Announcements. If a press release is required by law or the applicable rules of a national securities exchange to be issued upon execution of this Agreement or reasonably soon thereafter, the parties will mutually agree on such a press release. Neither party shall make any subsequent public announcement concerning this Agreement or the terms hereof not previously made public without the prior written approval of the other party with regard to the form, content, and precise timing of such announcement, except as may be required to be made by either party in order to comply with applicable law, regulations, court orders, or tax or securities filings. Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed by such other party. Before any such public announcement, the party wishing to make the announcement will submit a draft of the proposed announcement to the other party in sufficient time to enable such other party to consider and comment thereon. The parties agree that a party may disclose this Agreement’s existence and terms, and material developments or material information generated under this Agreement, in (i) securities filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (or equivalent foreign agency) to the extent required by law, or (ii) under conditions of confidentiality/nonuse in connection with investment and similar corporate transactions. Notwithstanding the above, once a public announcement has been made, either party shall be free to disclose to third parties any information contained in said public announcement.

 

KASAN_국제계약서 중 비밀보호계약, 비밀유지약정, NDA, CDA 조항 &ndash; 비밀정보 범위, 적용 배제대상, 비밀유지 의무, 위반시 조치 등 계약조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 11:00
:

 

26.1 Relationship of Parties. Each of the parties hereto is an independent contractor and nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be deemed to constitute a partnership, agency, employer-employee or joint venture relationship between the parties. No party shall have the right to, and each party agrees not to purport to, incur any debts or make any commitments or contracts for the other.

 

26.2 Compliance with Law. Each of the parties shall comply with all applicable international, federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, import/export restrictions, laws, rules and regulations governing product quality and safety and patent, copyright and trade secret protection.

 

26.3 Arbitration.

 

(a) Procedure. The parties recognize that bona fide disputes may arise which relate to the parties’ rights and obligations under this Agreement. The parties agree that except as provided in Section 7.4, any such dispute shall be resolved by alternative dispute resolution in accordance with the procedure set forth in Exhibit F.

 

(b) Confidentiality of Proceedings. All arbitration proceedings hereunder shall be confidential and the arbitrator(s) shall issue appropriate protective orders to safeguard each party’s Confidential Information. Except as required by law, no party shall make (or instruct the arbitrator(s) to make) any public announcement with respect to the proceedings or decision of the arbitrator(s) without prior written consent of the other party.

 

(c) Binding Effect. The provisions of this Section 12.3 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement, and shall be severable and binding on the parties hereto, notwithstanding that any other provision of this Agreement may be held or declared to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable.

 

26.4 Force Majeure. Neither party shall be liable for failure to perform, or delay in the performance of, its obligations under this Agreement (other than payment obligations) when such failure or delay is caused by an event of force majeure. For purposes of this Agreement, an event of force majeure means any event or circumstance beyond the reasonable control of the affected party, including but not limited to, war, insurrection, riot, fire, flood or other unusual weather condition, explosion, act of God, peril of the sea, strike, lockout or other industrial disturbance, sabotage, embargo, act of governmental authority, compliance with governmental order or national defense requirements, or inability to obtain fuel, power, raw materials, labor or transportation facilities. A failure of supply by CyDex’s supplier shall only be deemed an event of force majeure affecting CyDex if caused by a force majeure event affecting such supplier. If, due to any event of force majeure, either party shall be unable to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement (other than payment obligations), the affected party shall immediately notify the other party of such inability and of the period during which such inability is expected to continue and the time for performance [*].

 

26.6 Notices. Any notice, request, or communication under this Agreement shall be effective only if it is in writing and personally delivered; sent by certified mail, postage pre-paid; facsimile with receipt confirmed; or by nationally recognized overnight courier with signature required, addressed to the parties at the addresses stated below or such other persons and/or addresses as shall be furnished in writing by any party in accordance with this Section 12.6. Unless otherwise provided, all notices shall be sent:

 

12.8 Use of Name; Publicity. No party shall use the name, trademark, trade name or logo of the other party, its Affiliates or their respective employee(s) in any publicity, promotion, news release or public disclosure relating to this Agreement or its subject matter, without the prior express written permission of the other party, except as may be required by law or the rules of NASDAQ or the New York Stock Exchange. In the event of a required public announcement, the party making such announcement shall provide the other party with a copy of the proposed text before such announcement sufficiently in advance of the scheduled release of such announcement to afford such other party a reasonable opportunity to review and comment upon the proposed text and the timing of such disclosure.

 

12.9 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York (without giving effect to any conflicts of law principles that require the application of the law of a different state). The United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods is hereby expressly excluded.

 

12.10 Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement, together with the Quality Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement of the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, written or oral, between CyDex (and/or any of its Affiliates) and Hospira (and/or any of its Affiliates) relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof; provided, that any confidentiality/nonuse provisions of any prior agreement are not superseded and will remain in effect solely with respect to information provided under the terms of such prior agreement that is not subsequently provided to a Party under the terms of this Agreement. If the Quality Agreement contains terms or conditions inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement, the terms of the Quality Agreement will control and prevail solely with respect to quality issues, and the terms of this Agreement shall control and prevail for all other matters. This Agreement cannot be amended except by way of an express writing signed by both parties.

 

12.11 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and the rights and obligations hereof shall apply to, CyDex and Hospira and any successor(s) and permitted assigns. The name of a party appearing herein shall be deemed to include the names of such party’s successors and permitted assigns to the extent necessary to carry out the intent of this Agreement.

 

12.12 Waiver. The rights of either party under this Agreement may be exercised from time to time, singularly or in combination, and the exercise of one or more such rights shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any one or more of the others. No waiver of any breach of a term, provision or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed to have been made by either party unless such waiver is addressed in writing and signed by an authorized representative of that party. The failure of either party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement, or to exercise any option contained in this Agreement, shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment for the future of any such term, provision, condition or option or the waiver or relinquishment of any other term, provision, condition or option.

 

12.13 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a final and binding court or arbitration judgment to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, such provision shall not be not affected or impaired up to the limits of such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability; the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected or impaired in any way; and the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to replace such invalid, illegal and unenforceable provision (or portion of provision) with a valid, legal and enforceable provision that achieves, to the greatest lawful extent under this Agreement, the economic, business and other purposes of such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision (or portion of provision).

 

12.14 Assignment. Neither party may assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party; provided, however, that either party may assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, without such consent, to an Affiliate of such party or to any Third Party successor by merger or acquisition or by divestiture or spin-off of substantially all of the business to which this Agreement relates, upon written notice to the other party of any such assignment and, in the case of an assignment to an Affiliate, such party hereby guarantees the performance of any such Affiliate, and, in the case of a Third Party assignment, such Third Party shall assume the obligations of the assigning party under this Agreement. No assignment shall relieve any party of responsibility for the performance of any obligation, which such party may have or incur hereunder.

 

12.15 Third Party Beneficiaries. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended solely for the benefit of each party hereto and their respective Affiliates, related Indemnified Parties (as set forth in Section 9), successors or permitted assigns and it is not the intention of the parties to confer third-party beneficiary rights upon any other person, including without limitation Sublicensees.

 

12.17 Headings. The descriptive headings of this Agreement are for convenience only, and shall be of no force or effect in construing or interpreting any of the provisions of this Agreement.

 

12.18 Interpretation. The language used in this Agreement is the language chosen by the parties to express their mutual intent, and no provision of this Agreement will be interpreted for or against any party because that party or its attorney drafted the provision.

 

12.19 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original document, but both of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.

 

KASAN_국제계약서에 통상 들어가는 일반조항 GENERAL PROVISIONS 사례 &ndash; 제약회사 신제품 라이선스 및 생산공급 계약서 중 일반조항 샘플.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 10:00
:

 

The International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR) is a non-profit think tank that combines a decades-old heritage of thought leadership with the innovation of its diverse and collaborative membership to offer the most cutting edge dispute resolution services and resources available.

 

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

 

The parties recognize that bona fide disputes as to certain matters may arise from time to time during the term of this Agreement which relate to either party’s rights and/or obligations. To have such a dispute resolved by this Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) provision, a party [*].

 

If the matter has not been resolved within [*], either party may initiate an ADR proceeding as provided herein. The parties shall have the right to be represented by counsel in such a proceeding.

 

1. To begin an ADR proceeding, a party shall provide written notice to the other party of the issues to be resolved by ADR. Within [*] after its receipt of such notice, the other party may, by written notice to the party initiating the ADR, add additional issues to be resolved within the same ADR.

 

2. Within [*] days following receipt of the original ADR notice, the parties shall select a mutually acceptable neutral to preside in the resolution of any disputes in this ADR proceeding. If the parties are unable to agree on a mutually acceptable neutral within such period, either party may request the President of the CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution (“CPR”), 366 Madison Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, New York 10017, to select a neutral pursuant to the following procedures:

 

(a) The CPR shall submit to the parties a list of not less than [*] within [*] after receipt of the request, along with a Curriculum Vita for each candidate. No candidate shall be an employee, director, or shareholder of either party or any of their subsidiaries or Affiliates.

 

(b) Such list shall include a statement of disclosure by each candidate of any circumstances likely to affect his or her impartiality.

 

(c) Each party shall number the candidates in order of preference (with the number one (1) signifying the greatest preference) and shall deliver the list to the CPR within [*] following receipt of the list of candidates. If a party believes a conflict of interest exists regarding any of the candidates, that party shall provide a written explanation of the conflict to the CPR along with its list showing its order of preference for the candidates. Any party failing to return a list of preferences on time shall be deemed to have no order of preference.

 

(d) If the parties collectively have identified fewer than [*] deemed to have conflicts, the CPR immediately shall designate as the neutral the candidate for whom the parties collectively have indicated the greatest preference. If a tie should result between [*], the CPR may designate either candidate by lot. If the parties collectively have identified [*] or more candidates deemed to have conflicts, the CPR shall review the explanations regarding conflicts and, in its sole discretion, may either (i) immediately designate as the neutral the candidate for whom the parties collectively have indicated the greatest preference, or (ii) issue a new list of not less than [*], in which case the procedures set forth in subparagraphs 2(a)-2(d) shall be repeated.

 

3. No earlier than [*] or later than [*] after selection, the neutral shall hold a hearing to resolve each of the issues identified by the parties. The ADR proceeding shall take place at a location agreed upon by the parties. If the parties cannot agree, the neutral shall designate a location other than the principal place of business of either party or any of their subsidiaries or Affiliates.

 

4. At least [*] prior to the hearing, each party shall submit the following to the other party and the neutral:

 

(a) a copy of all exhibits on which such party intends to rely in any oral or written presentation to the neutral;

 

(b) a list of any witnesses such party intends to call at the hearing, and a short summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness;

 

(c) a proposed ruling on each issue to be resolved, together with a request for a specific damage award or other remedy for each issue. The proposed rulings and remedies shall not contain any recitation of the facts or any legal arguments and shall not exceed one (1) page per issue.

 

(d) a brief in support of such party’s proposed rulings and remedies, provided that the brief shall not exceed thirty (30) pages. This page limitation shall apply regardless of the number of issues raised in the ADR proceeding.

 

Except as expressly set forth in subparagraphs 4(a)-4(d), no discovery shall be required or permitted by any means, including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admissions, or production of documents.

 

5. The hearing shall be conducted on consecutive days and shall be governed by the following rules:

 

(a) Each party shall be entitled to [*] of hearing time to present its case. The neutral shall determine whether each party has had the [*] to which it is entitled.

 

(b) Each party shall be entitled, but not required, to make an opening statement, to present regular and rebuttal testimony, documents or other evidence, to cross-examine witnesses, and to make a closing argument. Cross-examination of witnesses shall occur immediately after their direct testimony, and cross-examination time shall be charged against the party conducting the cross-examination.

 

(c) The party initiating the ADR shall begin the hearing and, if it chooses to make an opening statement, shall address not only issues it raised but also any issues raised by the responding party. The responding party, if it chooses to make an opening statement, also shall address all issues raised in the ADR. Thereafter, the presentation of regular and rebuttal testimony and documents, other evidence, and closing arguments shall proceed in the same sequence.

 

(d) Except when testifying, witnesses shall be excluded from the hearing until closing arguments.

 

(e) Settlement negotiations, including any statements made therein, shall not be admissible under any circumstances. Affidavits prepared for purposes of the ADR hearing also shall not be admissible. As to all other matters, the neutral shall have sole discretion regarding the admissibility of any evidence.

 

6. Within [*] following completion of the hearing, each party may submit to the other party and the neutral a post-hearing brief in support of its proposed rulings and remedies, provided that such brief shall not contain or discuss any new evidence and shall not exceed thirty (30) pages. This page limitation shall apply regardless of the number of issues raised in the ADR proceeding.

 

7. The neutral shall rule on each disputed issue within [*] following completion of the hearing. Such ruling shall adopt in its entirety the proposed ruling and remedy of one of the parties on each disputed issue but may adopt one party’s proposed rulings and remedies on some issues and the other party’s proposed rulings and remedies on other issues. The neutral shall not issue any written opinion or otherwise explain the basis of the ruling.

 

8. The neutral shall be paid [*]:

 

(a) If the neutral rules in favor of one party on all disputed issues in the ADR, the losing party shall pay [*].

 

(b) If the neutral rules in favor of one party on some issues and the other party on other issues, the neutral shall issue with the rulings a written determination as to how such fees and expenses shall be allocated between the parties. [*].

 

9. The rulings of the neutral and the allocation of fees and expenses shall be binding, non-reviewable, and non-appealable, and may be entered as a final judgment in any court having jurisdiction.

 

10. Except as provided in paragraph 9 or as required by law, the existence of the dispute, any settlement negotiations, the ADR hearing, any submissions (including exhibits, testimony, proposed rulings, and briefs), and the rulings shall be deemed Confidential Information. The neutral shall have the authority to impose sanctions for unauthorized disclosure of Confidential Information.

 

11. The hearings shall be conducted in the English language.

 

KASAN_국제계약분쟁 해결방안 ADR, 공식 중재기관의 Arbitration 외 사적 조정방안 - The International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR) 선택 계약조항 소개.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 5. 10. 09:18
:

 

 

서울고등법원 20145141 판결도 존슨앤드존슨에서 재판매가격 유지행위를 공정거래법 위반으로 판결하였습니다.

 

서울고등법원은 판결문에서 "재판매가격을 정해 그 가격대로 판매할 것을 지시하는 행위가 단지 참고가격이나 희망가격으로 제시된 것이라면 위법하다고 볼 수 없지만, 그 지시 등을 따르도록 하는데 실효성을 확보할 수 있는 수단이 있다면 이는 공정거래법이 금지하는 재판매가격 유지행위에 해당한다"고 위법 판단기준을 제시한 후,

 

구체적을 아큐브 사안에서는 "존슨앤드존슨은 직원 또는 아르바이트생 등으로 하여금 거래 안경점과 비거래 안경점에서 아큐브 제품을 구입하게 하는 등 소비자 판매가격 준수 상태를 점검했고, 이를 어긴 안경점에 대해서는 최대 1개월까지 제품공급을 중단한 만큼 재판매가격 유지행위를 한 것으로 인정할 수 있다"고 판단하였습니다.

 

, 본사에서 소매점의 판매가격을 정해놓고 이를 실제로 준수하도록 강제했다는 것으로서, 이와 같은 판매가격 강제정책은 공정거래법에서 금지하는 재판매가격 유지행위에 해당한다는 판결입니다.

 

앞서 블로그에 올린 중국 사례도 비슷합니다. 참고자료로 다시 올려 드립니다.

 

다국적 제약회사 Johnson & Johnson v. 중국 총판회사 Ruibang 사이에서 의료기구 판매가격을 둘러싼 분쟁에서 제조사 Johnson& Johnson을 공정거래법 위반으로 판단하여 총판에 대한 손해배상 책임을 인정한 사례 - 중국 상해고급법원 2013. 8. 4. 선고 판결

 

다국적 제약회사 Johnson& Johnson은 중국회사 Ruibang과 중국 내 판매총판 계약을 체결하였습니다. 두 회사는 15년 동안 J&J의 다양한 의료기기 및 기구에 관한 중국 판매 사업에 관한 Distribution Agreement를 매년 갱신하는 방식으로 사업관계를 유지해 왔습니다.

 

양사가 2008 1월 서명한 갱신 계약서에는 특정 제품을 J&J에서 설정한 가격 이하로는 판매할 수 없다는 명시적 조항이 들어 있습니다. 그런데, 그 해 3 Ruibang은 중국 북경대학병원 납품계약 입찰에서 J&J에서 설정한 최저가격보다 더 낮은 가격으로 입찰하여 낙찰 받았습니다. 소위 저가 입찰을 하여 납품계약을 성사시킨 것입니다. 이에 J&J에서는 Ruibang에 대해 계약위반을 경고하였으며, 그 후 특정병원에 대한 Ruibang의 딜러 자격을 박탈하였고, 추가적으로 해당 제품 전체에 관한 딜러쉽 자체를 박탈하였습니다. 나아가, 2009년 총판계약 갱신을 할 때에 이르러서는 계약 전체의 갱신을 거절하였습니다. 이에 총판자격을 상실하게 된 Ruibang 2010 J&J를 상대로 공정거래법 위반혐의로 제소하였습니다.

 

위 사건에서 중국법원은 1,2심 모두 J&J의 공정거래법 위반행위를 인정하여 Ruibang에게 손해배상 책임을 인정하는 판결을 하였습니다. 이것은 중국에서 제조회사와 판매회사 사이에 판매회사의 재판매가격을 제한하는 행위를 공정거래법 위반으로 판단한 첫 판결이라고 합니다. 선진국으로 갈수록 공정거래법이 중요해지는 경향이 있는데, 이제 중국에서도 사업을 하는 과정에 공정거래법을 신중하게 검토하고 관련 이슈를 고려해야 한다는 점을 시사합니다.

 

공정거래법상 제판매가격제한에 관한 쟁점에 판시한 우리나라 대법원 판결을 소개한 뉴스레터를 참고로 포스팅합니다.

 

·     의약품 도매상에 대한 재판매가격유지 행위와 공정거래법 위반 여부 -

 

공정거래법 관련 대법원 판결: 대법원은 2010. 11. 25. 제약업계에 중대한 영향을 미칠만한 판결을 하였습니다. (대법원 2010. 11. 25. 선고 20099543 판결) 공정거래위원회로부터 시정조치 및 과징금 처분을 받았던 다수의 제약회사가 상고했던 공정거래법 사건으로 1 6개월이 넘는 기간 동안 신중한 심리를 거처 드디어 몇 가지 쟁점사항에 대한 중요한 판결을 하였습니다. 그 내용 중에서 의약품 판매와 관련된 도매상의 저가입찰에 관련된 사항을 Q&A 형식으로 정리해 설명드립니다.

 

사례: 제약회사 은 최근 1원 낙찰이 문제되자 거래선인 도매상 에게 전문의약품 A를 병원에 공급할 때 절대로 보험약가 이하로 공급하지 않는다는 약정서 체결을 요구하여 서명 받았다.

 

Q. 사이 위 약정서는 효력이 있는가?  

 

A. 양 당사자 내부에서는 계약자유 원칙상 유효라고 할지라도 대외적 관계에서 공정거래법 위반 문제가 있습니다. 제약회사 전문의약품 A를 도매상 에게 판매하면서 다시 A를 병원에 판매할 때의 가격(‘재판매가격’)을 통제하려는 행위는 공정거래법에서 위법한 행위로 규정하고 있습니다. 공정거래법 제29조 제1항은 “사업자는 재판매가격유지행위를 하여서는 아니 된다.”라고 규정하여 원칙적으로 금지하고 있고, 2조 제6호에서 “재판매가격유지행위라 함은 사업자가 상품 또는 용역을 거래함에 있어서 거래상대방인 사업자 또는 그 다음 거래단계별 사업자에 대하여 거래가격을 정하여 그 가격대로 판매 또는 제공할 것을 강제하거나 이를 위하여 규약기타 구속조건을 붙여 거래하는 행위“라고 그 의미를 정의하고 있습니다.

 

쉽게 얘기하면 상품유통 과정에서 상위에 있는 사업자가 다음 거래 단계의 판매가격을 정하려는 행위를 금지하는 것입니다. 그 취지는 자유로운 경쟁을 촉진하여 최종 소비자 가격이 낮아지도록 유도한다는 것입니다. 따라서, 상위단계 사업자인 제약회사가 상품유통의 다음 단계 사업자인 도매상의 판매가격을 통제하려는 위 약정 행위는 재판매가격유지행위에 해당하고, 이를 요구한 제약회사 은 공정거래법을 위반한 책임이 있습니다.

 

사례: 제약회사 은 도매상 스스로 약정한 것과는 달리 전문의약품 A를 특정병원에 1원에 입찰을 하자 거래중단을 경고한 후 재발방지를 서약하는 각서를 받았다.

 

Q. 사이 위 각서는 효력이 있는가?  

 

A. 마찬가지로 제약회사 의 행위는 “재판매가격유지행위”에 해당하여 위법하므로 실질적으로 효력이 없습니다. 오히려 공정거래법 위반책임만 지게 됩니다.

 

Q. 공정거래법을 위반한 제약회사에게 공정거래위원회는 어떤 법적 조치를 취할 수 있는가?  

 

A. 공정거래위원회는 위반행위의 중지 및 시정을 명령할 수 있습니다. 또한, 시정명령을 받았다는사실을 신문에 공표하도록 명령할 수 있습니다. 또한, 과징금을 부과할 수 있는데, 액수는 위법한 재판매가격유지행위로 인한 매출액의 2% 범위내의 금액, 만약 매출이 없는 경우에는 5억원 이내의 금액을 부과할 수 있습니다. 한편, 공정위 시정명령에 응하지 아니하는 등 불복하면 형사처벌을 받게 됩니다.

 

Q. 재판매가격유지행위가 예외적으로 허용되는 경우는 있는가?

 

A. 원칙적으로는 극히 예외적으로 허용됩니다. , 최저재판매가격유지행위가 당해 상표 내의 경쟁을 제한하는 것으로 보이는 경우라 할지라도, 시장의 구체적 상황에 따라 그 행위가 관련 상품시장에서의 상표 간 경쟁을 촉진하여 결과적으로 소비자후생을 증대하는 등 정당한 이유가 있는 경우에는 이를 예외적으로 허용합니다. 대법원은 그와 같은 정당한 이유가 있는지 여부는 관련시장에서 상표 간 경쟁이 활성화되어 있는지 여부, 그 행위로 인하여 유통업자들의 소비자에 대한 가격 이외의 서비스 경쟁이 촉진되는지 여부, 소비자의 상품 선택이 다양화되는지 여부, 신규사업자로 하여금 유통망을 원활히 확보함으로써 관련 상품시장에 쉽게 진입할 수 있도록 하는지 여부 등을 종합적으로 고려하여야 할 것이며, 이에 관한 증명책임은 관련 규정의 취지상 사업자에게 있다고 보아야 한다고 밝혔습니다.

 

그러나, 대법원은 위 사안에서 제약회사가 도매상들로 하여금 보험약가 수준으로 가격을 유지하도록 요구하는 행위는 위와 같은 정당한 이유에 해당하지 않는다고 판결하였습니다.

 

Q. 제약회사 이 도매상 의 극단적 난매행위를 저지할 방지할 방법은 없는가?

 

A. 앞으로 거래를 중단하는 것입니다. 다만, 공정거래법은 부당한 거래거절행위 또한 공정거래법 위반행위로 금지하고 있으므로 거래중단을 하기 전에 이에 해당하지 않도록 신중한 검토가 필요합니다.

 

사례: 제약회사 은 도매상들에게 지역과 거래대상 병원을 할당하였다. 그런데, 도매상 은 이를 어기고 몰래 자신에게 지정되지 않는 A 병원에 제품을 공급하였다.

 

Q. 제약회사 이 도매상 의 행위를 제재할 수 있는가?  

 

A. 거래지역이나 거래대상을 제한하는 행위는 양 당사자 내부에서는 계약자유 원칙상 유효라고 할지라도 대외적 관계에서 공정거래법 위반 문제가 있습니다. 위 판결 사안에서 제약회사들은 도매상들에 대하여 지정 납품처 아닌 곳에의 납품을 금지하고, 이를 어기는 도매상들을 적발하여 각서를 징구하거나, 경고장 발송, 거래 정리 등의 조치를 취하였습니다. 이와 같은 사안에서 대법원은 거래상대방을 제한하는 행위는 도매상들에 대하여 실질적인 구속력이 있었으므로, 공정거래법이 금지하고 있는 구속조건부거래에 해당한다고 판결하였습니다.

 

따라서, 제약회사 공정거래법 위반행위에 대해 재판매가격유지행위와 마찬가지로 시정조치 및 과징금 부과 등의 제재를 받게 됩니다.  

 

KASAN_[의료기기쟁점] 의료기기 판매 및 영업 활동 관련 공정거래법 위반 여부.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 16. 14:00
:

 

 

대법원 판결요지

구 특허법(2013. 3. 22. 법률 제11654호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 같다) 133조 제1항 전문은 이해관계인 또는 심사관은 특허가 다음 각 호의 어느 하나에 해당하는 경우에는 무효심판을 청구할 수 있다.”라고 규정하고 있다.

 

여기서 말하는 이해관계인이란 당해 특허발명의 권리존속으로 인하여 법률상 어떠한 불이익을 받거나 받을 우려가 있어 그 소멸에 관하여 직접적이고도 현실적인 이해관계를 가진 사람을 말하고, 이에는 당해 특허발명과 같은 종류의 물품을 제조·판매하거나 제조·판매할 사람도 포함된다.

 

이러한 법리에 의하면 특별한 사정이 없는 한 특허권의 실시권자가 특허권자로부터 권리의 대항을 받거나 받을 염려가 없다는 이유만으로 무효심판을 청구할 수 있는 이해관계가 소멸되었다고 볼 수 없다.

 

그 이유는 다음과 같다.

특허권의 실시권자에게는 실시료 지급이나 실시 범위 등 여러 제한 사항이 부가되는 것이 일반적이므로, 실시권자는 무효심판을 통해 특허에 대한 무효심결을 받음으로써 이러한 제약에서 벗어날 수 있다.

 

그리고 특허에 무효사유가 존재하더라도 그에 대한 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 그 특허권은 유효하게 존속하고 함부로 그 존재를 부정할 수 없으며, 무효심판을 청구하더라도 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 상당한 시간과 비용이 소요된다.

 

이러한 이유로 특허권에 대한 실시권을 설정받지 않고 실시하고 싶은 사람이라도 우선 특허권자로부터 실시권을 설정받아 특허발명을 실시하고 그 무효 여부에 대한 다툼을 추후로 미루어 둘 수 있으므로, 실시권을 설정받았다는 이유로 특허의 무효 여부를 다투지 않겠다는 의사를 표시하였다고 단정할 수도 없다.

 

이와 달리 실시권자라는 이유만으로 무효심판을 청구할 수 있는 이해관계인에 해당하지 않는다는 취지로 판시한 대법원 1977. 3. 22. 선고 767 판결, 대법원 1983. 12. 27. 선고 8258 판결을 비롯한 같은 취지의 판결들은 이 판결의 견해에 배치되는 범위 내에서 이를 모두 변경하기로 한다.

 

첨부: 대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 20172819 전원합의체 판결

 

KASAN_[특허분쟁] Licensee 실시권자가 Licensor 특허권자를 상대로 License 대상 특허권에 대한 무효심판청구 가능 대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 2017후2819 전원합의체 판결.pdf

대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 2017후2819 전원합의체 판결.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 13. 11:00
:

 

 

 

 

KASAN_[특허분쟁] Licensee 실시권자가 Licensor 특허권자를 상대로 License 대상 특허권에 대한 무효심판청구 가능 대법원 2019. 2. 21. 선고 2017후2819 전원합의체 판결.pdf

 

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 13. 10:00
:

 

 

 

대법원 20172819 판결요지: 실시권자 licensee의 무효심판 청구 가능

 

특허권의 실시권자에게는 실시료 지급이나 실시 범위 등 여러 제한 사항이 부가되는 것이 일반적이므로, 실시권자는 무효심판을 통해 특허에 대한 무효심결을 받음으로써 이러한 제약에서 벗어날 수 있다.

 

그리고 특허에 무효사유가 존재하더라도 그에 대한 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 그 특허권은 유효하게 존속하고 함부로 그 존재를 부정할 수 없으며, 무효심판을 청구하더라도 무효심결이 확정되기까지는 상당한 시간과 비용이 소요된다.

 

이러한 이유로 특허권에 대한 실시권을 설정받지 않고 실시하고 싶은 사람이라도 우선 특허권자로부터 실시권을 설정받아 특허발명을 실시하고 그 무효 여부에 대한 다툼을 추후로 미루어 둘 수 있으므로, 실시권을 설정받았다는 이유로 특허의 무효 여부를 다투지 않겠다는 의사를 표시하였다고 단정할 수도 없다.”

 

대법원 201242666 판결 요지 특허무효 소급효 제한 적용 라이선스 계약 취소 불인정 + 기 지급한 로열티 반환청구 불인정 + 장래 로열티 지급의무 소멸

 

(1)   특허실시계약의 체결 이후 대상특허가 무효로 확정된 경우 특허권자가 실시권자로부터 이미 지급받은 특허실시료를 부당이득으로 반환할 의무가 있는지 여부 - 부정

(2)   실시계약의 체결 이후 계약의 대상이 된 특허가 무효로 확정된 경우 착오를 이유로 특허발명 실시계약을 취소할 수 있는지 여부 부정

 

“특허발명 실시계약에 의하여 특허권자는 실시권자의 특허발명 실시에 대하여 특허권 침해로 인한 손해배상이나 그 금지 등을 청구할 수 없게 될 뿐만 아니라 특허가 무효로 확정되기 이전에 존재하는 특허권의 독점적ㆍ배타적 효력에 의하여 제3자의 특허발명 실시가 금지되는 점에 비추어 보면, 특허발명 실시계약의 목적이 된 특허발명의 실시가 불가능한 경우가 아닌 한 특허무효의 소급효에도 불구하고 그와 같은 특허를 대상으로 하여 체결된 특허발명 실시계약이 그 계약의 체결 당시부터 원시적으로 이행불능 상태에 있었다고 볼 수는 없고, 다만 특허무효가 확정되면 그때부터 특허발명 실시계약은 이행불능 상태에 빠지게 된다고 보아야 한다.

 

따라서 특허발명 실시계약 체결 이후에 특허가 무효로 확정되었더라도 앞서 본 바와 같이 특허발명 실시계약이 원시적으로 이행불능 상태에 있었다거나 그 밖에 특허발명 실시계약 자체에 별도의 무효사유가 없는 한 특허권자가 특허발명 실시계약에 따라 실시권자로부터 이미 지급받은 특허실시료 중 특허발명 실시계약이 유효하게 존재하는 기간에 상응하는 부분을 실시권자에게 부당이득으로 반환할 의무가 있다고 할 수 없다. 

 

특허는 그 성질상 특허등록 이후에 무효로 될 가능성이 내재되어 있는 점을 감안하면, 특허발명 실시계약 체결 이후에 계약의 대상인 특허의 무효가 확정되었더라도 그 특허의 유효성이 계약체결의 동기로서 표시되었고 그것이 법률행위의 내용의 중요부분에 해당하는 등의 사정이 없는 한, 착오를 이유로 특허발명 실시계약을 취소할 수는 없다고 할 것이다.”

 

KASAN_[특허라이센스분쟁] 특허권자 Licensor 상대로 실시권자 Licensee가 대상특허에 대한 무효심판청구 가능 그 결과 특허무효의 경우 계약상 실시료 Royalty 지급의무 범위 및 소멸시기 대법원 2.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 13. 09:00
:

 

 

기술이전 License 중 많은 경우가 기술이전 이후부터 상업적 발매까지 추가 연구개발에 많은 비용과 시간이 필수적으로 투입되어야만 합니다. 대표적으로 신약기술 이전 License 케이스가 이와 같습니다.

 

Licensor 수입의 대부분은 Running Royalty이므로 상업적 판매까지 제품개발이 성공적으로 완료되는지 여부는 License 양 당사자 모두에게 매우 중대한 영향을 미칩니다. 그와 같은 중대한 development 관련 사항 중 License 계약서에 반영되어야 할 내용은 어떤 것인지 사례를 통해 살펴보겠습니다.

 

아래에서 일본제약회사와 다국적 제약회사가 체결한 신약의 물질특허에 대한 Exclusive License Agreement Development 조항을 간략하게 살펴보겠습니다. Licensor 일본회사 Shionogi에서 신약물질 특허권을 보유하고, Licensee AstraZeneca에 대해 해당 특허의 전용실시권 허여 및 상업화 권리를 부여하는 기술이전 license 계약입니다.

 

비록 Crestor License Agreement는 조금 오래 된 계약서이지만, 실제 엄청난 성공을 거둔 신약개발 기술이전 프로젝트로서 실무자가 참고자료로 살펴볼 필요가 있다고 생각합니다.

 

참고로, 최근에는 양 당사자가 참여하는 Joint Steering Committee (JSC), Joint Development Committee (JDC)를 구성하여, 정기적 회의를 통해 후속 연구개발의 진행, 성과평가, 조정, 결정 등을 해나가는 방식이 자주 활용되고 있습니다. 이를 위해 처음부터 License Agreement에 이와 같은 JSC 등에 관한 계약조항을 두는 경우가 많습니다.

 

Article 3.  Development

 

3.1

SHIONOGI shall disclose the KNOW-HOW, which is necessary, useful or advisable for ZENECA to obtain the HEALTH REGISTRATION APPROVAL and to develop, manufacture, use, distribute, market and sell the LICENSED PRODUCTS, in each country of the TERRITORY, after the execution of this Agreement without delay to the extent not done so already.  If the visits of SHIONOGI’s representative(s) to ZENECA’s facilities are reasonably requested by ZENECA relating to the disclosure of KNOW-HOW to ZENECA, SHIONOGI will send an appropriate representative(s) to ZENECA’s facilities; provided that ZENECA shall bear the expenses of travel and accommodations for such representative(s).

 

SHIONOGI will provide ZENECA with all reasonable assistance required in order to transfer the KNOW-HOW to ZENECA in a timely manner.  Such assistance will include, but shall not be limited to those items listed in the Schedule attached.

 

3.3

ZENECA shall develop and register the PRODUCTS in the TERRITORY on its sole responsibility as if the PRODUCTS had been derived from ZENECA’s own research pipeline.  Prior to October 31, 1998, ZENECA shall prepare a development schedule (hereinafter referred to as the “DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE”), and shall allow SHIONOGI the opportunity to comment upon it.  The DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE shall contain the estimated time schedule of pre-clinical studies, clinical trials, New Drug Application (“NDA”) filings, launches and other related activities to be conducted by ZENECA with respect to the PRODUCTS in Europe, the U.S.A. and Japan.  The first DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE (hereinafter referred to as the “ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE”) shall be attached to this Agreement as Appendix III.

  

3.4

ZENECA may also pursue the feasibility for the development and commercialization of the COMBINATION PRODUCTS.  If ZENECA decides to carry out the development of any COMBINATION PRODUCTS leading to their commercialization, ZENECA shall promptly inform SHIONOGI of such intention in writing and provide SHIONOGI with the development schedule therefor.

 

3.5

If ZENECA reasonably foresees or becomes aware of any delay of six (6) months or more in the actual development of the PRODUCTS as compared with the timing set forth in the ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE or any later modified DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, ZENECA shall promptly inform SHIONOGI of such delay in writing.  Whereupon ZENECA may modify such DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE upon consultation with SHIONOGI, but for the avoidance of doubt, such consultation shall be for information only and ZENECA will not be required to obtain SHIONOGI’s approval to any such modification.

 

3.6

Any and all development costs for the LICENSED PRODUCTS in the TERRITORY shall be solely borne by ZENECA.

 

3.7

ZENECA shall provide SHIONOGI with a bi-annual report on the progress in the development of LICENSED PRODUCTS in the TERRITORY in order to keep SHIONOGI informed of the progress.  ZENECA also agrees to have meetings with SHIONOGI in a timely manner (at least once a year) in order to report on the progress in the development of LICENSED PRODUCTS in the TERRITORY.  If any application of Investigational New Drug (“IND”), Clinical Trial Exemption (“CTX”) and/or NDA is filed with the competent authorities in Europe, the U.S.A. and Japan, ZENECA shall provide SHIONOGI with a summary of all dossier submitted to such authorities (including any amendments thereto).  The provisions of Article 8.1 shall apply to any information disclosed hereunder, and SHIONOGI shall not be permitted to use any such information for any purpose other than evaluating the progress of ZENECA’s development of the LICENSED PRODUCTS.

 

3.8

Upon completion of phase II clinical trials for the LICENSED PRODUCTS, ZENECA shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by informing in writing SHIONOGI of its intention to terminate this Agreement as well as the background of such decision.  On termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Article 3.8, ZENECA shall not be obliged to make any further payments under Article 4.

3.9

If and when the HEALTH REGISTRATION APPROVAL is obtained in any country of the TERRITORY, ZENECA shall promptly inform SHIONOGI of such HEALTH REGISTRATION APPROVAL and send to SHIONOGI a copy of the approval letter, along with an English translation thereof, of such HEALTH REGISTRATION APPROVAL issued by the competent health authority of such country.  The provisions of Article 8.1 shall apply to any information disclosed hereunder, and SHIONOGI shall not be permitted to use any such information for any purpose other than evaluating the progress of ZENECA’s development of the LICENSED PRODUCTS.

 

3.10

If ZENECA chooses to market the LICENSED PRODUCTS in Japan and/or Taiwan with a partner other than ZENECA’s AFFILIATE in such countries, ZENECA shall offer to SHIONOGI the first opportunity to be ZENECA’s marketing partner for the LICENSED PRODUCTS in Japan and/or Taiwan.  With regard to the terms and conditions of the marketing of LICENSED PRODUCTS in Japan and/or Taiwan, SHIONOGI and ZENECA shall negotiate such terms and conditions in good faith.  If the PARTIES are unable to agree upon such terms and conditions, ZENECA shall be free to offer the opportunity to a THIRD PARTY on terms and conditions no more favorable than those offered to SHIONOGI.

 

KASAN_[국제계약실무] 신약 물질특허 기술이전 Exclusive License 계약서 중 Development 조항.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 12. 18:00
:

 

 

특허 license에서 자주 쟁점이 되는 사항이고 실제 발생할 수 있는 사안입니다. 아래 그림에서 표시한 각 특허 사이의 관계와 License Agreement 조항의 문언표현을 꼼꼼하게 잘 살펴보시기 바랍니다.

 

 

1. license 대상특허 범위 및 쟁점

License 계약서에 라이선스 대상특허 '250 및 그 후속특허 "including any continuation, continuation-in-part and divisional patent applications that claim priority to Opana® ER Patents"로 표현되어 있습니다. 여기서 '250 특허가 Opana® ER Patents에 해당합니다.

 

계약체결 후 등록된 위 '216 특허와 '122 특허가 위와 같은 계약문언의 범위에 해당하는지 여부가 쟁점입니다. 그림에서 보듯 노란색 '250 특허와 녹색의 쟁점 특허 2건은 직접 연결된 관계가 아닙니다.

 

다만, 청색으로 표시한 '357 출원이 중간에 개입되어 있습니다. 그것을 매개로 녹색표시특허들도 노란색 특허와 동일하게 license 대상특허로 해석할 수 있는지 문제됩니다.

 

2. 미국법원 판결

CAFC 판결은 위와 같은 상황에서 '216 특허와 '122 특허는 license 대상 특허범위에 포함되지 않는다고 판결하였습니다. 기타 묵시적 license도 인정하지 않았습니다. , licensor Endolicensee Actavis, Roxanegeneric 제품 발매에 대해 기존 등록특허에 관하여 체결한 license의 존재에도 불구하고 다시 추가 등록한 '216 특허와 '122 특허에 기초한 특허권을 행사할 수 있다고 보았습니다.

 

Generic 제품발매 회사로서는 불의타에 해당하는 황당한 상황을 맞았습니다. CAFC 3인 합의재판부 중 1명의 소수의견 Dissent Opinion에서는 license 대상을 특허로 표현한 것과 제품으로 표현한 것을 엄격하게 구별해야 하고, 적어도 제품을 기준으로 라이선스 계약을 체결한 경우 위 특허도 라이선스 대상특허에 해당한다는 의견 설시가 흥미롭습니다. 공감할 내용이 많은데도 불구하고 아쉽게도 소수의견에 그쳤습니다. 특허 라이선스 실무공부 삼아 읽어 보시기 바랍니다.

 

3. No Implied License 조항

CAFC 판결에서는 계약서의 다음과 같이 묵시적 라이선스를 허용하지 않는다는 계약조항을 중요한 판단근거로 삼았습니다. 라이선스 계약 실무상 매우 중요한 포인트입니다.

 

“Endo does not grant to Actavis [or Roxane] . . . any license, right or immunity, whether by implication, estoppel or otherwise, other than as expressly granted herein.”

 

참고자료로 다른 계약서에서 표준형식의 조항을 인용합니다. "No Other Rights. No rights, other than those expressly set forth in this Agreement are granted to either Party hereunder, and no additional rights will be deemed granted to either Party by implication, estoppel, or otherwise. All rights not expressly granted by either Party to the other hereunder are reserved."

 

Licensee의 묵시적 라이선스 주장은 부제소조항(not to sue)에도 근거를 두고 있습니다. licensee에 대한 소송을 제기하지 않는다는 계약조항은 곧 후속 등록 특허권에 대한 license 합의로도 해석할 수 있다는 주장입니다.

 

그라나, CAFC 판결은 위와 같이 묵시적 허락을 배제하는 명시적 계약조항을 우선해야 한다고 명확하게 밝혔습니다. 묵시적 라이선스 이론이 적용될 수 있고, 따라서 상충되는 해석이 가능한 상황에서도, 처분문서에 해당하는 계약서에 명시적으로 기재된 묵시적 라이선스를 배제한다는 문언이 훨씬 더 강력한 효력을 발휘한다는 점을 명확하게 판시하였습니다.

 

위 판결은 Licensee 입장에서 조금 억울한 면이 있을 것입니다. 실무적 대응방안으로는 특허만을 라이선스 대상범위의 기준으로 설정하는 것보다 여기에 더하여 제품기술을 라이선스 범위설정의 기준으로 함께 설정한다면 안정할 것입니다.

 

기술이전이나 license 당시에는 등록되지 않았고 독립된 특허출원도 아니었으나 그 후 분할출원, 연속출원 등을 통해 등록되는 특허문제는 매우 중요합니다. 관련 쟁점에 관한 좋은 참고가 될 분쟁사례와 판결입니다. CAFC 판결문을 소수의견까지 모두 꼼꼼하게 살펴보시길 권합니다.

 

KASAN_[라이선스계약분쟁] License 계약의 대상특허의 범위 - 계약체결 이후 등록된 특허 중에서 License 대상특허로 볼 수 있는 등록특허의 범위 미국 Endo Pharm Opana&reg; ER 특허분쟁 판결.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 12. 17:00
:

 

 

세계적 블록버스터 신약의 물질특허에 대한 Exclusive License 및 추가 R&D Collaboration Agreement 중에서 특허관련 계약조항을 인용하고 간략하게 살펴보겠습니다. 신약물질을 개발한 일본 제약회사 Shionogi에서 신약물질 특허권을 보유하고, 대형 제약회사 AstraZeneca에 대해 해당 특허의 전용실시권 허여 및 상업화 권리를 부여하는 기술이전 license 계약입니다. 이미 상당한 시간이 지난 오래 된 계약서이지만, 실제 엄청난 성공을 거둔 신약개발 기술이전 프로젝트로서. 실무자가 참고자료로 살펴볼 가치가 높다 생각합니다.

 

Article 7.  Inventions (추가 연구개발 발명에 대한 권리관계 규정. 단독 발명의 경우 개발회사에 권리귀속 확인 + 공동발명은 공동으로 결정 권한 보유 및 비용 등 책임도 분담 규정)

 

Inventions which are made and which relate to the COMPOUNDS and/or LICENSED PRODUCTS shall belong to the PARTY making such invention.  Each PARTY shall have the right to file, prosecute and maintain patent applications and patents covering inventions made solely by that PARTY.  

 

If an invention is made jointly by the PARTIES, such invention shall be jointly owned.  Neither PARTY shall file any patent application(s) containing such joint invention and/or any information or data received from the other PARTY without the prior written consent of the PARTY providing the information or data.  

 

SHIONOGI and ZENECA shall mutually determine whether or not patent applications should be filed concerning such joint inventions, which PARTY shall be responsible for filing and prosecuting any patent applications filed, and share the costs in filing any patent applications, obtaining and maintaining any patents covering joint inventions.

 

Article 9.  Representation and Warranty (진술 및 보증조항. 특허유효 및 권리 소유관계, 타인의 권리침해 여부 등에 관한 성실한 조사 및 그 결과에 따른 인식범위로 보증책임 제한. 무제한 보증 아님.)

 

9.1

SHIONOGI represents and warrants that it is the owner of the entire right, title and interest in the PATENTS listed in Appendix II hereto and KNOW-HOW, and is entitled to grant the licenses specified herein.  SHIONOGI further hereby represents and warrants that, to the best of its knowledge, the PATENTS owned or controlled by SHIONOGI or SHIONOGI’s AFFILIATES are being procured from the respective Patent Offices in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.

 

9.2

SHIONOGI represents and warrants that it has full corporate power to enter into this Agreement and to carry out the provisions hereof.

 

9.3

ZENECA represents and warrants that it has full corporate power to enter into this Agreement and to carry out the provisions hereof.

 

9.4

SHIONOGI represents that, as of the EFFECTIVE DATE, it is not aware of any infringement or threatened infringement of the PATENTS or KNOW-HOW by a THIRD PARTY.

 

9.5

SHIONOGI represents and warrants that, to the best of SHIONOGI’s knowledge, ZENECA’s exploitation or use of the PATENTS and/or KNOW-HOW hereunder will not infringe any patent or other intellectual property right enjoyed by any THIRD PARTY (with the exception of Hoechst European Patent Applications No.  88120057.0 and any foreign applications or patents corresponding thereto).

 

9.6

SHIONOGI represents that, as of the EFFECTIVE DATE, SHIONOGI has no knowledge from which it can reasonably be inferred that the PATENTS are invalid.

 

Article 11.  PATENTS (특허출원, 심사 및 등록과장에서 라이센시의 검토 및 참여권리 보장. 특허권리 확보에 라이센시 참여권 부여)

 

11.1

SHIONOGI has the responsibility to file, prosecute and maintain the PATENTS and shall bear all cost for the PATENTS, including fees and expenses paid to outside legal counsel and experts, direct costs of in-house counsel and filing, prosecution and maintenance expenses associated therewith.

 

11.2

SHIONOGI shall provide ZENECA with an opportunity to review and comment on the nature and text of new or pending applications for the PATENTS.

 

11.3

SHIONOGI shall advise ZENECA on an annual basis of progress in the prosecution of all patent applications and in the maintenance or extension of patents falling within the PATENTS and shall, on request, furnish ZENECA with a copy of the patent application, patent or other document pertinent to prosecution, maintenance or extension of such applications and patents.

 

11.4

No significant steps regarding prosecution of the PATENTS will be taken by SHIONOGI without prior consultation with ZENECA.  In particular, no steps concerning European Patent Application No.  92111090.4 or US Patent 5,260,440 will be taken by SHIONOGI without prior consultation with ZENECA.

 

11.5

If SHIONOGI elects not to continue to prosecute a patent application or not to maintain or extend any patent application or patent within the PATENTS, SHIONOGI shall notify ZENECA not less than two (2) months before any relevant deadlines.  Thereafter ZENECA shall have the right to pursue at its expense, and at its sole discretion, the prosecution, extension or maintenance of such application or patent.  Any costs incurred by ZENECA pursuant to this shall be offset against royalties payable under Article 4.

 

11.6

ZENECA may request SHIONOGI to seek additional patent protection for the COMPOUNDS or LICENSED PRODUCTS in the TERRITORY, for example, by way of patent registration, patent of importation or revalidation, or the like.  If SHIONOGI chooses to seek such additional patent protection, it shall do so at its own cost and in its own name.  If SHIONOGI chooses not to seek such additional patent protection, ZENECA may require SHIONOGI to do so; provided ZENECA reimburses SHIONOGI for any reasonable expenses incurred in doing so.  Such patent property shall then be included within the definition of PATENTS.

 

11.7

SHIONOGI shall immediately advise ZENECA of any certification filed under the U.S.  “Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984” (“ANDA ACT”) claiming that any PATENTS are invalid or claiming that the PATENTS will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of a product for which an application under ANDA ACT is filed.

 

11.8

The PARTIES will cooperate with each other in gaining patent term extension(s) or the like, where applicable to the PATENTS in the TERRITORY, for example, under the U.S.  “Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984” or under a supplementary protection certificate in European countries.

 

11.10

Upon reasonable request of ZENECA, SHIONOGI will provide ZENECA with all necessary assistance relating to the PATENTS, including allowing ZENECA access to SHIONOGI’s files and documents and access to SHIONOGI’s personnel who may have possession of relevant information.

 

Article 12.  Infringement of PATENTS (라이선스 대상 특허권을 제3자가 침해할 경우 양당사자의 침해대응 책임 및 협력 방안, 대상 특허실시로 타인 권리를 침해하는 경우 분쟁 대응 책임 및 협력 방안 규정)

 

12.1

In the event that ZENECA or SHIONOGI supposes that a THIRD PARTY may be infringing any of the PATENTS by the manufacture, use, distribution, marketing or sale of the COMPOUNDS and/or LICENSED PRODUCTS, ZENECA or SHIONOGI shall promptly notify the other PARTY in writing, identifying the infringer and the infringement complained of and furnishing the information upon which such determination is based.  ZENECA shall be entitled, in its sole discretion but after notifying SHIONOGI, to take any measures deemed appropriate to stop such infringing activities by such THIRD PARTY in the TERRITORY or to grant to the infringing THIRD PARTY adequate rights and licenses necessary for continuing such activities in the TERRITORY so long as ZENECA remains in compliance with Article 4.  Upon reasonable request by ZENECA and at ZENECA’s cost, SHIONOGI shall give ZENECA all reasonable information and assistance including allowing ZENECA access to SHIONOGI’s files and documents and access to SHIONOGI’s personnel who may have possession of relevant information, and if necessary to prosecute any legal action, joining in the legal action as a party.

 

12.2

ZENECA shall bear the cost of any action or measures taken in accordance with Article 12.1 and shall be entitled to receive any damages or remuneration received as a result of such action or measures.

 

12.3

In the event ZENECA decides, within sixty (60) days of becoming aware of an infringement, in its sole discretion, not to take any action against a THIRD PARTY deemed to infringe the PATENTS, ZENECA shall inform SHIONOGI in writing and SHIONOGI thereafter shall be entitled to pursue an action to stop such infringement in its own name and for its own account.  Upon reasonable request by SHIONOGI and at SHIONOGI’s cost, ZENECA shall give SHIONOGI all reasonable information and assistance.  Any damages or remuneration received as a result of such action shall be received by SHIONOGI.

 

12.4

In the event of any actual or threatened suit against ZENECA or its AFFILIATES, SUBLICENSEES or customers alleging that the exploitation or use of the PATENTS and/or KNOW-HOW hereunder infringes the patent or other intellectual property rights of a THIRD PARTY, ZENECA shall promptly give written notice to SHIONOGI.  SHIONOGI will provide to ZENECA all reasonable assistance requested by ZENECA to defend or settle such suit and in particular SHIONOGI will promptly make available to ZENECA, free of charge, all information in its possession or control which will assist ZENECA in defending or otherwise dealing with such suit.  ZENECA shall have the right to defend in its sole discretion such suit but shall consult with SHIONOGI before settling such suit.  ZENECA shall not settle the suit without obtaining prior written consent of SHIONOGI which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.  If damages or costs are awarded against ZENECA for such infringement, or if the outcome of the suit is that ZENECA is ordered to or agrees to make payments or pay royalties to a THIRD PARTY in order to secure the right to continue the exploitation or use of the PATENTS and/or KNOW-HOW hereunder, then the following percentages of such damages, payments, or royalties shall be offset against royalties payable by ZENECA under Article 4: [***].

 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, in any event described above, SHIONOGI shall be entitled to receive at least [***] percent ([***]%) of the royalties due under Article 4 hereof from ZENECA in any one calendar year.

 

KASAN_[국제계약실무] 신약물질 기술이전 License 계약서 중 특허관련 계약조항 사례.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 12. 16:00
:

 

 

1. 사안의 개요

Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH)은 전립선암, 자궁암, 유방암을 포함하여 많은 내분비계 질환과 관련된 것으로 알려져 있습니다. NY 소재 Mt. Sinai 의과대학 Dr. Sealfon 교수는 1998년경 GnRH 관련 질병치료제 개발의 기본 tool에 해당하는 연구개발성과에 대한 2건의 특허를 등록하고, 1999. 8. 27. San Diego 소재 벤처기업 Neurocrine Biosciencesnonexclusive license를 허여하는 계약을 체결하였고, Neurocrine10여년간의 연구개발 끝에 2010년경 대기업 Abbott(현재 AbbVie)와 신약연구개발 성과(신약후보 물질 Elagolix )에 대한 exclusive license 계약을 체결하였습니다.

 

최초 라이선스 계약서 중 sublicense 허용조항은 다음과 같습니다. Neurocrine may "grant sublicenses under the License only with the prior written consent" of Mt. Sinai.

 

Neurocrine에서 AbbVie와 라이선스 계약을 체결하면서 Mt. Sinai 의과대학의 사전동의를 받지 않았습니다. 그것이 라이선스 계약위반에 해당하는지, 손해배상책임 여부가 문제됩니다.

 

한편, Elagolix는 현재 FDA 허가심사 중인데, Mt. Sinai 의과대학에서 향후 신약에 대한 Royalty를 받을 수 있는지 등이 중대한 문제입니다.

 

2. 특허라이선스와 Licensee의 특허무효 부쟁의무

원칙적으로 licensee 입장에서 대상특허의 무효항변을 제기하는 것은 허용됩니다. 미국연방대법원 Lear v. Adkins (1969) 판결: a licensee cannot be estopped from challenging the validity of a patent merely because it benefitted from the license agreement.

 

그러나, 라이선스 계약위반으로 이미 성립된 책임을 회피하기 위해 사후적으로 제기하는 특허무효 주장은 허용되지 않는다는 것이 미국법원 판결입니다. Studiengesellshaft Kohle v. Shell Oil (CAFC 1997) 판결: Lear does not apply where a licensee seeks to avoid contractual obligations already owed at the time of the suit. It "must prevent the injustice of allowing a licensee to exploit the protection of the contract and patent rights and then later to abandon conveniently its obligations under those same rights."

 

3. 미국법원의 Licensee Neurocrine의 대상특허 무효항변 배척 판결

미국법원은 sublicense 허용조건으로 licensor의 사전동의를 받도록 한 계약조항을 위반한 행위에 대한 손해배상을 구하는 범위내에서 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용되지 않는다고 판결하였습니다.

 

다만, 사안을 구별하여, 특허권자가 특허기술 사용에 대한 장래 royalty를 청구하는 경우는 licensee의 특허무효 항변이 허용될 수 있다는 취지의 판결입니다. 이 부분에 대한 라이선스 계약위반 사항은 없기 때문입니다.

 

참고로 licensee특허비침해 주장도 하였지만, 미국법원은 위 사안에서 라이선스 계약위반에 대한 항변으로 허용될 수 없다고 명확하게 판결하였습니다.

 

대학의 특허발명에 출발하여 벤처기업에서 10여 년간 연구개발한 성과를 다시 대규모 제약회사에 라이선스하여 최종적으로 신약허가신청까지 성공한 사례입니다. 여기서 최초 대학과 체결한 라이선스 계약에 관한 분쟁으로 라이선스 실무자들에게 흥미로운 사건입니다.

 

중도 합의로 종결되어 최종 손해배상금액까지 결정한 최종 판결이 나오지 않을 가능성이 높지만 비록 중간 판결 일지라도 모니터링해볼 흥미로운 사례라고 생각합니다.

 

미국법원 사건 정보 Case: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai v. Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc., No. 15 Civ. 9414, S.D.N.Y.

 

KASAN_[기술이전계약] 특허권자 Licensor 미국대학 vs Licensee 벤처회사 Sub-licensee 대기업 AbbVie 라이선스 계약분쟁 중 라이센시 특허무효 항변 불허 및 부쟁조항 효력인정 미국법원 판결.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

작성일시 : 2019. 4. 12. 15:00
:

 

 

1. 업무상 배임죄 기본 법리

 

배임죄는 타인을 위하여 그 사무를 처리하는 자가 그 임무에 위배되는 행위로써 재산상의 이익을 취득하거나 제3자로 하여금 이를 취득하게 하여 본인에게 재산상의 손해를 가하는 경우 성립하는 죄(형법 제355조 제2)입니다.

 

배임죄에서 '임무에 위배하는 행위'라 함은 처리하는 사무의 내용, 성질 등에 비추어 법령의 규정, 계약의 내용 또는 신의칙상 당연히 하여야 할 것으로 기대되는 행위를 하지 않거나 당연히 하지 않아야 할 것으로 기대되는 행위를 함으로써 본인과의 신임관계를 저버리는 일체의 행위를 포함한다(대법원 2003. 1. 10. 선고 2002758판결). 그 범위가 매우 넓다고 생각하면 될 것입니다.

 

업무상 배임죄가 성립하려면 주관적 요건으로서 임무위배의 인식과 그로 인하여 자기 또는 제3자가 이익을 취득하고 본인에게 손해를 가한다는 인식, 배임의 고의가 있어야 합니다. 피고인이 배임죄의 범의를 부인하는 경우에는 사물의 성질상 배임죄의 주관적 요소로 되는 사실은 고의와 상당한 관련성이 있는 간접사실을 증명하는 방법에 의하여 증명할 수밖에 없고, 이 때 무엇이 상당한 관련성이 있는 간접사실에 해당할 것인가는 정상적인 경험칙에 바탕을 두고 치밀한 관찰력이나 분석력에 의하여 사실의 연결상태를 합리적으로 판단하여야 합니다(대법원 2004. 3. 26. 선고 20037878 판결).

 

2. 핵심 쟁점 배임의 고의

 

영업비밀 침해분쟁에서 당사자는 대부분 배임의 고의를 부인합니다. 특히, 보안관리가 미흡하여 영업비밀로 인정받지 못하는 경우 퇴직자는 더욱 더 배임의 고의를 부인하는 경우가 많습니다. 위 대법원 판결에서 판시한 것처럼, 법원이 간접사실에 근거하여 판단할 수 밖에 없습니다. 따라서, 사건에 관련된 구체적 사실을 어떻게 주장하고 입증하여 판사를 설득하는가에 따라 결론이 달라질 것입니다.

 

3. 배임의 고의 불인정 사례

 

대법원 2010. 7. 15. 선고 20089066 판결: "회사에 근무하면서 프로그램 개발업무를 수행하는 과정에서 복사 및 취득한 것으로 보이는 점, 회사에서는 이 사건 각 프로그램파일이 비밀로 관리되지 않은 채 피고인들과 같은 연구원들의 경우 별다른 제한 없이 이를 열람, 복사할 수 있었고 복사된 저장매체도 언제든지 반출할 수 있었던 점, 피고인들이 이 사건 각 프로그램파일을 복사하여 취득한 것은 업무인수인계를 위한 것이거나 자료정리 차원에서 관행적으로 행해진 것으로 볼 여지도 없지 않은 점, 피고인들이 회사를 퇴직한 후 개발한 프로그램은 회사의 프로그램과 유사하거나 이를 변형 또는 참조하였다고 보기 어렵다는 컴퓨터프로그램보호위원회에 대한 감정촉탁회신결과에 의하면 피고인들은 실제로도 이 사건 각 프로그램파일을 FCS 프로그램을 개발하는 데 이용하지는 아니한 것으로 보이는 점 등 여러 사정들을 고려할 때, 이 사건 각 프로그램파일을 복사하여 취득할 당시 피고인들에게 업무상배임의 고의가 있었다고 단정하기 어렵다."

 

대법원 2009. 5. 28. 선고 20085706 판결: "피고인 2는 기숙사에 남은 짐을 빼기 위해 회사로 찾아온 피고인 1로부터 컴퓨터에 저장되어 있는 개인파일과 가족사진 등을 새로 산 개인용 노트북에 옮겨달라는 부탁을 받고, 컴퓨터의 자료파일을 노트북에 옮긴 후 그날 되돌려 준 사실, 이 사건 자료파일은 위 자료들 속에 별도로 구분되지 않은 채 포함되어 있었던 사실, 회사는 중요자료를 별도 관리하는 시스템을 갖추고 있지 않았던 사실, 이 사건 자료 파일이 회사의 영업비밀이 아니라고 확인되어 무혐의 처분을 한 사실, 압수·수색결과 회사 내에서 이 사건 자료파일이 사용되었다고 볼만한 아무런 자료도 확인되지 않은 사실, 등 기록에 나타나는 제반 사정을 위 배임의 고의에 관한 법리에 비추어 볼 때, 피고인들에게 공모하여 회사의 중요자료를 유출하고 회사에게 손해를 입게 한다는 배임의 고의가 있었다고 단정하기 어렵다."

 

4. 실무적 포인트

 

영업비밀을 유출한 경우는 업무상 배임죄까지 쉽게 인정되므로 문제될 소지가 없습니다. 그러나, 보완관리가 부실하여 영업비밀로 인정할 수 없고 단지 업무상 배임 책임만 문제되는 경우 대부분 퇴직자는 기술유출 또는 회사 자료유출에 관한 배임의 고의를 부인합니다.

 

퇴직자가 배임의 고의를 강하게 부인하면, 관련된 정황증거 등 간접사실을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단할 수 밖에 없습니다. 이와 같은 경우 실제 사건에서 배임의 고의를 인정할 수 있는지 판단하는 것이 매우 어렵습니다. 소개한 대법원 판결까지 있지만 모든 사안에 적용할 수 있는 것이 아니고, 구체적 사안에 따라 또 다른 판단이 나올 수 밖에 없습니다. 방어하는 퇴직자도 책임을 묻는 회사도 정확한 법리와 폭넓은 시각에 기반한 신중한 대응전략이 필요할 것입니다.

 

한편, 형법상 업무상 배임죄는 고의를 요건으로 하지만, 민법상 불법행위 책임은 고의 또는 과실을 요건으로 합니다. 법률요건의 차이로 인해 동일한 사안에서도 형사사건과 민사소송에서 그 결론이 달라질 수 있습니다. 사안에 대한 정확한 검토와 객관적 판단이 반드시 필요하고, 그와 같은 정확한 판단에 기초하여 가장 효과적인 소송전략을 검토해 보아야 할 것입니다.

 

KASAN_[업무상배임죄쟁점] 영업비밀 침해분쟁에서 회사자료를 무단 유출한 직원의 업무상 배임죄 책임 여부 &ndash; 배임의 고의 판단.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 3. 20. 14:00
:

 

 

대법원 2011. 6. 30. 선고 20093915 판결 - “회사 직원이 경쟁업체 또는 스스로의 이익을 위하여 이용할 의사로 무단으로 자료를 반출한 행위를 업무상 배임죄로 의율함에 있어서는, 그 자료가 반드시 영업비밀에 해당할 필요까지는 없다고 하더라도, 적어도 그 자료가 불특정 다수인에게 공개되어 있지 않아 보유자를 통하지 않고서는 이를 통상 입수할 수 없고, 그 자료의 사용을 통해 경쟁자에 대해 경쟁상의 이익을 얻을 수 있는 정도의 영업상 자산에 해당할 것을 요한다.”

 

위 대법원 판결을 분석해 보면, 첫째, 외부로 유출된 자료가 영업비밀에 해당하면 영업비밀침해죄는 물론 업무상 배임죄에도 해당한다는 점에 문제가 없으나, 둘째, 만약 그 자료가 영업비밀 요건을 충족하지 못하는 경우에는, 그 자료가 다음과 같은 2가지 요건, (1) 그 자료가 불특정 다수인에게 공개되어 있지 않아 보유자를 통하지 않고서는 이를 통상 입수할 수 없을 것, (2) 그 자료의 사용을 통해 경쟁자에 대해 경쟁상의 이익을 얻을 수 있는 정도의 영업상 자산에 해당할 것이란 요건을 동시에 충족해야만 업무상 배임죄의 책임을 물을 수 있다는 것입니다.

 

공지내용의 자료라면 공중의 영역에 속하는 것으로 누구나 자유롭게 이용할 수 있다 할 것이므로, 영업비밀이 될 수도 없고 특정인이 독점할 수 있는 영업용 자산으로 볼 수도 없다는 이유입니다. 따라서, 소송에서 그 자료내용이 공지된 것이라고 입증할 수 있는지 여부가 매우 중요합니다.

 

그 다음으로, 그 자료 자체는 공지된 것이 아니라고 하더라도 그 내용이 공지 정보의 조합이라든지, 또는 공지내용과 사소한 차이는 있지만 크게 다르지 않아서 실질적으로 공지된 내용으로 볼 수 있는 경우에 어떻게 할 것인지 문제됩니다. 이때 위 판례에서 제시한 2번째 요건이 중요한 기준이 됩니다.

 

그 자료의 사용을 통해 경쟁상의 이익을 얻을 수 있다면 그 자료를 유출한 행위는 업무상 배임에 해당하게 됩니다. 그 자료의 반출로 인해 보유자에게 손해가 생기고 무단 입수자에게 이익을 주는 결과를 낳기 때문입니다. 따라서, 영업비밀 분쟁에서 특정 자료의 반출로 인한 보유자의 손해발생 및 무단 반출자 또는 입수자의 이익을 입증한다면 그들에게 업무상 배임죄의 책임을 물을 수 있을 것입니다.

 

한편, 보유자가 해당 자료를 만드는데 상당한 시간, 노력 및 비용이 투입되었고, 설령 경쟁사도 그와 같은 자료를 만들 수는 있지만 마찬가지로 상당한 시간과 비용이 필요한 경우에 경쟁사가 그 자료를 사용하는 경우라면 업무상 배임죄의 대상이 되는 영업용 자산에 해당합니다. 또한, 관련 분쟁소송에서는 반출된 자료가 실제 영업에 사용되었는지 여부, 또는 조만간 사용될 가능성이 있는지 여부가 중요한 판단요소로 작용합니다. 그 결과 경쟁상의 이익을 취할 수 있는지 여부를 판단할 수 있기 때문입니다. 보유자 입장에서는 그와 같은 사실을 입증할 수 있다면 상대방에 대해 업무상 배임의 책임을 묻는데 큰 문제 없을 것입니다.

 

방어자 입장에서는 반출된 자료가 영업비밀에 해당하지 않는다는 선에서 방어노력을 그쳐서는 안됩니다. 위에서 설명한 바와 같이 영업비밀에 해당하지 않더라도 업무상 배임죄의 대상이 되는 자료에 해당하는지 여부가 문제되기 때문입니다. 해당 자료가 공지정보라면 문제 없으나 공지정보가 아니라면 나아가 영업에 사용된 적이 없다는 점 및 사용되더라도 경쟁상 영향이 없는 자료라는 점을 주장 입증해야만 책임을 면할 수 있을 것입니다.

 

KASAN_[영업비밀분쟁] 무단 자료유출 행위에 대한 업무상배임 책임과 유출자료의 조건.pdf

 

[질문 또는 상담신청 입력하기]

 

 

작성일시 : 2019. 3. 20. 12:00
: