Consistent advocacy. Bridging divides. We are your specialists in litigation and alternative dispute resolution.
Dispute Resolution
We are passionate about providing resolute and vigorous legal representation in our specialized areas of the law.
Whether in unfair competition law or in trademark, design and copyright law, whether in the protection of trade secrets or in distribution law: litigation is our core competence. As experienced litigators, we fight with passion and determination to enforce and defend your interests in court.
Whether it be a cease-and-desist letter, preliminary injunction or court action: We work with our clients to determine the best strategy and implement it in a targeted manner.
From out-of-court settlement negotiations to arbitration proceedings, we are experts in alternative dispute resolution.
Sometimes it is wiser to settle a dispute out of court. We identify such cases and guide them to a solution that preserves your resources.
Henning Harte-Bavendamm has many years of experience in arbitration, serving both as a party representative and as an arbitrator.
On the subject: From our IP blog
The General Court also dismisses OpenAI’s action: No EU trademark protection for the word mark “OPENAI”—at least for now.
LG München I, judgment of 31.07.2026 – 42 O 763/25. In its second landmark judgment on the relationship between copyright and AI training, the Munich Regional Court (LG München I) has found the operator of the AI music generator Suno liable for infringement of copyright in six popular musical works. Notably, the 42nd Civil Chamber has, for the first time in a German judgment, applied the US fair use doctrine to AI training – and rejected it. We summarise the decision and set it in context.
In its judgment of 9 July 2026 (C-788/24), the ECJ followed the Opinion of Advocate General Rantos in the legal dispute concerning the online publication of “The Diary of Anne Frank”. At its core, the case centred on the question of whether geoblocking measures constitute effective technological protection measures against copyright infringements, even if they can be circumvented by VPN services. The Court has now answered this question with a clear ‘yes’.
The judgment ‘Obligation to Return VI’ (I ZR 123/25) of 3 June 2026 is – as the name suggests – the sixth judgment by the First Civil Senate of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on the so-called obligation to return applicable to hire cars. Following the pronouncement of the judgement, it was widely reported that the BGH had confirmed the continued validity of one of the most controversial provisions of passenger transport law. In the meantime, the dust has settled somewhat and it is becoming clear that this interpretation falls far short of the mark. Indeed, it follows from the grounds of the judgement that maintaining the obligation to return contravenes EU law if one takes its traditional objective and justification as a basis.
Three reasons for choosing HARTE-BAVENDAMM
Satisfied clients, numerous top-tier rankings, major professional publications, extensive litigation experience: intellectual property law is our core competence.
We represent your interests with ingenuity and dedication. We protect your intellectual property and develop creative strategies. Complex cases are our strength.
As a reliable partner, we provide our clients with resolute, poised, and effective guidance. In challenging conflict scenarios, our team is well aware that cooler heads always prevail and excel at delivering valuable and advantageous solutions to our clients.
