The beneficiary of an ex officio license referred to in Articles 69, 74 and 75 above may
bring the infringement action where the owner fails to bring such action after having been
served formal notice.
211. The owner of an application for a patent or a certificate of addition deriving from a
main patent, or the owner of a patent or a certificate of addition deriving from a main patent,
shall be allowed to use any means of proving the infringement of which he claims to be a
victim.
He may moreover, further to a writ issued by the President of the court for the place of
infringement, give rise to a detailed description, with or without seizure, of the allegedly
infringing goods or processes to be conducted by a notarial officer, assisted by an expert,
where appropriate.
The implementation of said writ may be subject to the provision of security by the
applicant.
In the same writ, the President of the court may authorize a notarial officer, assisted by a
qualified expert, who shall be responsible for any declaratory examination needed to establish
the origin, nature and scope of the infringement.
The same right shall be available to the beneficiary of an exclusive right to work on the
condition laid down in the second paragraph of Article 202 of this Law, as well as, subject to
the condition provided for in Article 210 above, to the beneficiary of a compulsory license or
an ex officio license.
Where the petitioner fails to institute legal proceedings before the court within a
maximum of 30 days as from the date of implementation of the writ, the detailed description,
with or without seizure, shall be considered invalid as of right, without prejudice to the award
of any damages.
212. At the request of the aggrieved party, and provided that the measure is necessary
to ensure the prohibition on continuing the infringement, the court may order the seizure, for
the petitioner’s benefit, of known infringing articles, which are the property of the infringer
on the date of the prohibition’s entry into force and, where applicable, that of the devices or
means specifically intended for carrying out the infringement.
Due consideration shall be given to the value of the goods seized when calculating the
compensation allocated to the beneficiary of the sentence imposed.
SECTION II
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
213. Any deliberate violation of the rights of a patent owner, as defined in Articles 53
and 54 above, shall constitute infringement and shall be punishable by two to six months’
imprisonment and a fine of 50,000 to 500,000 dirhams, or by only one of these two penalties.
In the case of recidivism, the penalties may be doubled.
Recidivism shall be deemed to have occurred under this Article where a conviction for
identical acts handed down against the accused within the past five years has become
irrevocable.
The court may also order the destruction of the known infringing articles which are the
property of the infringer, as well as that of the devices or means specifically intended for
carrying out the infringement.