Philip Schmitz
Partner

Contact

E
schmitz@lubbergerlehment.com
T
+49 40 81 95 14 810
W
LinkedIn
Theodorstraße 41a
22761 Hamburg
Download vCard

Profile

Philip Schmitz is active in the areas of trademark, design, copyright and unfair competition law. He advises national and international clients and represents them in litigation proceedings. His focuses are the combatting of product piracy and advising on IP law in corporate transactions. Further, he advises in the field of ecommerce.

Philip Schmitz studied law at the University of Hamburg. After completing his legal clerkship at international law firms, a competition chamber of the Hamburg Regional Court and the Chamber of Foreign Trade in Hong Kong, he worked as a lawyer for Baker & McKenzie from 2015. He joined Lubberger Lehment in 2018. In 2022, he was appointed Associated Partner and became an equity partner in 2023.

Biography

Since 2023
Partner of Lubberger Lehment
2022
Associated Partner of Lubberger Lehment
2019
Senior Associate in the firm Lubberger Lehment
2018
Associate in the firm Lubberger Lehment
2015–2018
Associate at Baker & McKenzie in Munich
2013–2015
Legal clerkship at the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg, with focus on intellectual property law
2013
Research assistant at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, Hamburg
2004–2012
Study of law at Universität Hamburg

Forums

  • GRUR (German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property)
  • INTA: Legislation and Regulation Committee

Publications

  • Nachweis rechtserhaltender Benutzung im Widerspruchsverfahren,
    BPatG, 2. Juli 2018, 25 W (pat) 513/16, GRUR-Prax 2018, 432
  • Eintragungshindernis “wertbestimmende Form” erfasst nicht Schuhsohlenfarbe, EuGH, 12. Juni 2018, C-163/16 –
    Louboutin/Van Haren, GRUR-Prax 2018, 301
  • Zur Einordnung von Autofelgen als Bauelemente nach der “Reparaturklausel” in der GGV
    Urteilsanmerkung zu EuGH, Urt. vom 20.12.2017 –
    C-397/16 und C-435/16 GRUR 2018, 290 ff. (zusammen mit J. Druschel und P. Engert)
  • No tea for two? European Court of Justice confirms the essential function of an EU collective mark is not to distinguish goods according to geographical origin
    Urteilsanmerkung zu EuGH, Urt. v. 20.09.2017 – C-673/15 bis C-676/15
    EIPR 2018, 199 ff. (zusammen mit B. Clark und A. Zalewska)

Current topics: