在我國專利侵權訴訟，以往均認為不能進行權利有效性之判斷，造成權利救濟之拖延，常被詬病。本文嘗試以比較法之觀點，指出世界絕大多數國家，不論是否採公、私法二元制度，幾乎均不再堅持在專利侵權訴訟不得就專利有效性問題為判斷，並以理論之發展，甚至立法明文之方式，使專利紛爭逐步實現一次訴訟解決之理想。本文第 2 部分即廣泛介紹美、英、日、韓、德、法等世界主要國家，在侵權訴訟中處理專利有效性問題之制度現況，而於第 3 部分則根據第 2 部分分析結果，檢討我國現制，並說明侵權訴訟，得進行有效性判斷之理論基礎，以及在侵權訴訟中判斷有效性時，可能面臨之處理上問題，並嘗試提出本文之見解。而第 4 部分則係結論。

In Taiwan, civil court does not decide on invalidity of a patent in infringement proceedings. It is criticized widely for its serious delay of legal remedy. This thesis tries to highlight the tenacity confronted to the international trend. In Chapter II, the article introduces and analyzes several main judicial systems of the world dealing with the validity problem of patent in infringement litigation, such as U.S.A., Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Germany, and France. Referring to the analysis results, Chapter III reviews the current regulations of our country and explicates the theoretical foundation that justifies the court’s deciding on the validity of patent. This chapter also brings up the probable questions while judging the validity of patent would confront, and offers personal opinions about treatments. Then the thesis ends with a review in Chapter IV.

利有效性;舉發;無效訴訟;侵權訴訟;再審查

patent validity; invalidation action; invalidation litigation; infringement litigation; re-examination