Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Assistant Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Social Sciences, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2
Master's Degree, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
10.48300/jlr.2022.300747.1746
Abstract
Legal certainty in all aspects of a contract from start to conclusion is one of the key factors in welcoming people to international trade. One of these important aspects is determining the applicable law in the event of a dispute between the parties in contractual and non-contractual litigation that are related to the basic contract. the contractual disputes are like lawsuits for termination, the obligation to repair, the obligation to provide replacement of goods, etc., and among the non-contractual lawsuits are the lawsuits for violation, validity or ownership of the basic right. When these claims are made in the field of intellectual property, governments, because of their territorial rules, recognize the principle of territorial jurisdiction over such claims and refuse to apply the law of other countries on intellectual property. This paper examines the WIPO documents, in particular the two documents proposed by the American Law Institute and the Max Planck Institute regarding the law governing these claims. Finally, the solution is that in order to achieve legal certainty in determining the law governing intellectual property, states can end the conflict of laws by authenticating the party's autonomy. So, this is how countries can help the development of international trade and the predictability of claims in this area. Also, by comparing the two proposed documents, some suggestions have been made regarding the maximum certainty of the Max Planck draft.
Keywords
)