Injunction Overturned, Claim for Damages Dismissed

In the case “Craveri Saic c/ Pierre Fabre Medicament S.A. y otro s/ Daños y Perjuicios” (docket 1503 /2012), Division II of the Federal Court of Appeals in Civil and Commercial Matters upheld the lower court’s decision that had rejected the plaintiff’s claim for damages.

In 2009, Pierre Fabre had requested a precautionary measure to prevent Craveri from using the trademark "CYCLIC" for pharmaceutical products used to treat chronic venous insufficiency in class 5, citing its trademark “CYCLO 3,” registered in the same class. The lower court granted the requested injunction, but this decision was later overturned by the Federal Court of Appeals.

Following the appellate court’s ruling, Craveri filed a lawsuit against Pierre Fabre, seeking compensation for damages allegedly incurred as a result of the injunction that was later overturned. Craveri quantified its claim for compensation at ARS 2,433,684.34 plus interests and legal costs.

The lower court rejected Craveri’s claim, finding that had not been abuse in Pierre Fabre’s request for the injunction, as no fraudulent, negligent, or reckless conduct was evident when the measure was sought. Craveri appealed this decision.

The Federal Court of Appeals reviewed the case and upheld the lower court’s ruling. In its decision, the Court emphasized that reversing an injunction does not, in itself, justify the awarding of damages.

The Court highlighted that under Argentine law, subjective liability is required for damages to be awarded, and that the claimant must prove that the party requesting the injunction was fully aware of the lack of merit in its claim.

Furthermore, the Court quoted article 208 of the Procedural Code, which stipulates that compensation is only due if abuse or excessive exercise of rights is demonstrated. In this case, no such abuse or excess was proven, as the injunction was granted based on evidence that, at the time of the request, was sufficient to justify its issuance.