page 18
Article 71: The license shall be struck from the register at the request of the patent holder or
licensee upon presentation of proof that the licensing contract has expired or
been terminated.
Article 72: Unless stipulated otherwise in the licensing contract, the granting of a license
shall not preclude for the licensor either the possibility of granting licenses to
other persons provided he informs the licensee, or that of himself exploiting the
patented invention.
Section 2: Unenforceable clauses
Article 74: Any clauses contained in the licensing contracts or agreed in relation to these
contracts shall be null and void if they impose on the licensee, in industrial or
commercial terms, limitations which do not stem from the rights conferred by
the patent or are not necessary for the maintenance of such rights.
Article 75: Unless stipulated otherwise in the licensing contract, the license may not be
assigned to third parties and the licensee shall not be authorized to grant sublicenses.
Article 76: The following shall not be considered limitations as defined by Article 74:
1. Restrictions concerning the measurement, scope or term of exploitation of the
patented invention;
2. The obligation for the licensee to refrain from any act which could harm the
validity of the patent.
Article 77: Ascertainment of the unenforceable clauses as defined by Articles 74 to 76 shall
be made by the competent court, at the request of any interested party.
Chapter VII: Compulsory and non-voluntary licenses
Section 1: Compulsory licenses for failure to work
Article 78: At the request of any interested person or the Public Prosecutor’s Office,
submitted after the expiration of a period of four years as from the date of filing
of the patent application or three years as from the grant of the patent, it being
necessary to apply the period which expires last, a compulsory or non-voluntary
license may be granted if one or more of the following conditions has been met:
1. The public interest, in particular national security, nutrition, health or the
development of other vital sectors of the national economy, so requires;
2. A judicial or administrative body has deemed that the way in which the patent
holder or his licensee are exploiting the invention is abusive, anti-competitive
or fails to meet reasonable conditions of demand for the protected product in
sufficient quality and quantity;