STOICA & ASOCIAȚII has achieved an important victory for a client providing software solutions in a dispute concerning provisional measures for the preservation of electronic evidence. As shown in the recent reasoning of the court decision, the Bucharest Court of Appeal fully confirmed the interpretation proposed by the team of lawyers consisting of Dan-Rareș Răducanu (Senior Partner) and Mircea Vasile (Associate): the time limit for bringing an action on the merits concerning the protection of intellectual property rights begins to run from the date on which the provisional measures for the preservation of evidence ordered/approved/authorized by the court were actually taken with the support of the bailiff, and not from the date of the judgment.

This final judgment obtained by the STOICA & ASOCIAȚII team provides a fair solution to an extremely sensitive issue that economic operators seeking to protect their intellectual property rights may face.

Essentially, the main arguments for interpretation (set out in detail in an article published in the second half of last year - Introducing the action on the merits after obtaining provisional measures in intellectual property disputes), which were confirmed by the court, are as follows:

• With regard to measures to preserve evidence, the legislator uses the following phrase contained in Article 979(2)(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure: "the court may order, in particular: (...) (b) the taking of measures necessary to ensure the preservation of evidence. The wording of the text justifies the thesis that the court only orders provisional measures for the preservation of evidence to be taken through the bailiff;
• The phrase "measures taken" refers to the moment when the measures are actually taken and is explained by the purpose of the rule - to protect the person against whom the measure was granted, so that they do not suffer the possible negative consequences indefinitely, without a court being seized with the analysis of the merits of the dispute. However, as long as the measure has not yet been taken, it does not affect the opposing party in any way;
• In support of this hypothesis, the following argument can be made: in the same Article 979 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in paragraph 8, the legislator established that the 30-day period provided for in the latter legal text starts to run from the date of the judgment. However, by regulating the starting point of the two periods in paragraphs 6 and 8 of Article 979 differently, the legislator has thus implied that the moment when the "measure is taken" is not equivalent to the moment when the judgment is delivered.

With a history of over 30 years in the business law market, STOICA & ASOCIAȚII has gained national and international recognition in the world of law and business through its legal assistance and representation of a vast portfolio of clients. Since its establishment in 1995, the lawyers at STOICA & ASOCIAȚII have proven themselves to be a strong team, based on respect for its principles: Fidelitas, Integritas, Fortitudo. STOICA & ASOCIAȚII has earned an excellent national and international reputation. Its professional achievements are recognized in the most important legal guides: Chambers Europe, Legal 500, WTR 1000, IAM Patent 1000.