Partner | IP & technology, Life sciences, IT Litigation, Patents and technology, Trade marks, designs and advertising

Jaap Bremer

T: +31 70 376 06 25
E: jaap.bremer@barentskrans.nl
View Jaap Bremer on LinkedIn

Jaap’s practice focuses on Intellectual Property litigation, in particular with respect to patents, trademarks and advertising. Jaap has extensive experience in infringement and invalidity litigation, as well as in parallel import, anti-counterfeiting and customs enforcement matters, particularly for clients in the pharma & life sciences, food & beverage and consumer products industries. He also regularly advises clients in non-contentious matters, including negotiation and drafting of licence and coexistence agreements. Jaap is internationally recognized as a specialist in both patent law and trademark and copyright law. In Chambers 2020, he was the only lawyer in the Netherlands to be ranked in both categories.

Selected directory listings

“Digging into the details of cases and providing rock-solid support” to Mylan and many others, Jaap Bremer “has unrivalled knowledge and expertise in the pharmaceutical area and is one of the best patent litigators in the country. – IAM Patent 1000, 2020

Jaap Bremer is recommended as an ‘excellent advocate‘ who is ‘highly competent, pragmatic and deliberate‘. – Legal 500, 2020

Clients regard Jaap Bremer as a “down-to-earth straight-shooter” who is “very solid and personable.” He acts on cases relating to both trade mark and patent disputes. – Chambers Global & Europe 2020

Clients value his “very practical advice, commercial awareness and strong technical knowledge.” Chambers Global & Europe 2019

Professional activities

Member of Editorial Board EPLAW Patent Blog
Active member of the International Trademark Association (INTA)
Member of various professional associations, including EPLAW, PTMG, LES, BMM, VFenR, VvRr and MARQUES.
Member of Vereniging Intellectuele Eigendom Proces Advocaten (VIEPA)

Pharma update | NPS’s cinacalcet patent held valid by Court of Appeal

EP ‘761, owned by Shire-NPS Pharmaceuticals Inc. (‘NPS’), relates to the API cinacalcet, which is used for the treatment of conditions of impaired regulation of calcium levels in human blood and tissue fluid. The product is marketed under the name Mimpara®. In September 2017, Accord Healthcare Ltd. and Accord Healthcare B.V. (‘Accord’) initiated invalidity proceedings

Pharma update – 10 July 2020 | Supreme Court decides on pemetrexed & fulvestrant

In this Update we report on two recent judgments of the Dutch Supreme Court. On 12 June 2020 a judgment was rendered on pemetrexed in the interim relief proceedings between Fresenius Kabi Nederland B.V. (“Fresenius”) and Eli Lilly & Company(“Lilly”). On 26 June 2020, the Supreme Court decided on fulvestrant in final relief proceedings between

Pharma update – 8 July 2020 | Confidentiality & Proportionality: New patent case law

In this Update we report on a few developments in Dutch telecom patent cases that have a broader bearing, making them also interesting for the pharma industry. On 13 May 2020, the District Court of The Hague rendered judgment about confidentiality in patent infringement proceedings (DTS v. Samsung). Earlier, on 17 March 2020, the The

Telecoms update | District court imposes confidentiality regime in patent infringement proceedings

On 13 May 2020, the District Court of The Hague (“the Court”) rendered a judgment in final relief proceedings between DTS and Samsung regarding the alleged infringement of two of DTS’ European patents. Samsung’s non-infringement defence dealt with security aspects of its mobile devices. Given the sensitive nature of these security aspects, Samsung requested the

Jaap Bremer

Selected directory listings

Professional activities

News and publications

Pharma update | NPS’s cinacalcet patent held valid by Court of Appeal

Pharma update – 10 July 2020 | Supreme Court decides on pemetrexed & fulvestrant

Pharma update – 8 July 2020 | Confidentiality & Proportionality: New patent case law

Telecoms update | District court imposes confidentiality regime in patent infringement proceedings