我國智慧財產民事訴訟中，以往囿於「公、私法訴訟二元制」之體系設計，被告即便認為原告所主張之智慧財產權有無效的理由，亦僅能循行政救濟的途徑主張，並無法直接於民事訴訟中直接提起智慧財產權無效抗辯，造成民事訴訟程序之延滯等不便。我國預計於 2007 年間設立智慧財產法院，而該法院之設立對於我國智慧財產案件之爭訟將產生巨大而直接之影響，而攸關該法院成敗之主要關鍵⎯⎯「智慧財產法院組織法」及「智慧財產案件審理法」等二法案，業已送立法院進行審查。其中「智慧財產案件審理法」已於 2007 年 1 月 9 日經立法院三讀通過，「智慧財產法院組織法」亦已於2007 年 3 月 5 日經立法院三讀通過。「智慧財產案件審理法」中一項劃時代的變革，即是在第 16 條第 1 項規定：「當事人主張或抗辯智慧財產權有應撤銷、廢止之原因者，法院應就其主張或抗辯有無理由自為判斷」，易言之，該法條規定將直接改變目前我國「公、私法訴訟二元制」的現狀，對於專利訴訟當事人間自產生重大之影響，然依據該法案之規定，是否確能達到立法者之目的？以及是否需要有其他配套制度？本文將介紹我國智慧財產訴訟中專利權無效抗辯相關制度沿革，並嘗試提供分析意見，同時就目前各國相關專利訴訟制度之設計，提供分析及建議。

In the past, the defendant of intellectual property (IP) litigation cannot raise the defense of patent invalidity in the civil litigation. The defendant can only file an invalidity action against the IP at issue. Such judicial system design delays the proceeding of the civil litigation of the IP infringement. The IP Court is proposed to be established in 2007. The establishment of the IP Court will change the current court proceeding of the intellectual property litigations tremendously. The core structure of establishment of IP Court is based on the “IP Court Organic Law” and “IP Trial Law.” The IP Trial Law has been passed by the Legislative Yuan on January 9, 2007 and the IP Court Organic Law has been passed by the Legislative Yuan on March 5, 2007. Paragraph 1, Article 16 of the IP Trial Law states that “the Court shall determination the intellectual property invalid defense raised by the defendant.” This Article will change the dual approaches of the public law and the private law in our current legal system and will create great impacts on both parties of the intellectual property litigation. This report would like to introduce and analyze this new court proceeding design and provide useful analysis and suggestions with respect to this new development.

實證研究;專利權無效;專利訴訟;公私法訴訟二元制

empirical study;patent invalidity;patent litigation;dual approaches of public law and private law