Legalist and realist decision-making in patent law: Validity cases in Germany

Jakob Hoffmann, Johannes Glückler, Tamar Khuchua, Francois Lachapelle, Emmanuel Lazega and Marius Zipf
Additional contact information
Jakob Hoffmann: LMU Munich

No p354r, SocArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: While realist approaches towards judicial decision-making have become predomi- nant, their appropriateness is much less obvious for specialized or technical fields of law, such as patent litigation, and evidence is much scarcer than for generalist courts. Addressing this scarcity, the paper assesses judge-level variation in deci- sion outcomes based on a sample of 1,722 collegial decisions on patent validity at the German Federal Patent Court. Using a Bayesian mixed membership multilevel model, we find that after controlling for variation due to other contextual factors, there remains significant statistical variation in the propensity to nullify a patent at the level of individual judges. However, judge effects are relatively weak and uncer- tain, indicating mitigation of individual deviation through collegiality. We conclude by discussing the relevance of consistent judicial outcomes beyond the studied con- text and especially in transnational harmonization processes, such as initialized by the recent establishment of the Unified Patent Court.

Date: 2024-03-15
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ipr and nep-law
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/65f2b048e5e51c1114bc56c1/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:socarx:p354r

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/p354r

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in SocArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().