Regardless, the patent proceedings continue and it is likely that the Federal Patent Court will hear the nullity case in the first half of 2022.

The procurement case from Haenel against the German Armed Forces continues in the second instance next year. Meanwhile, another aspect of the contractual dispute has come to the fore concerning which party submitted the most economical bid. Now the German Armed Forces procurement authority, the Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw), must comprehensively review the awarding of the contract. The company has filed an application for review under public procurement law. Haenel, which is a traditional German company known for producing hunting rifles.įor Heckler & Koch, the army’s decision to change suppliers is economically problematic. The army then awarded the contract to C.G. For 60 years, its assault rifle supplier was Heckler & Koch. The patent dispute is set against the background of a major contract from the German Armed Forces. Haenel is likely to appeal the decision at the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court. The court did not award the claim for indemnification, as well as parts of the claims for damages, information, accounting, and recall for a specified period of time, based on the statute of limitations defence.įurthermore, the court did not stay proceedings pending a nullity suit filed at the Federal Patent Court (case ID: 7 Ni 29/20), as the infringement proceedings only concern a part of the patent.Ĭ.G. The dispute concerns the openings for rapid water drainage from the gun. Specifically, the rifle manufacturer enforced European patent EP 20 18 508 B1, which protects a type of rifle-locking system. Haenel’s CR 223 assault rifle infringes a patent held by competitor Heckler & Koch. Düsseldorf Regional Court has ruled that C.G.

Heckler and koch