All intellectual property rights have in common that they establish an exclusive right to their owners. The right holder however, may authorize third parties to use the brand or designs by license. Once a third party infringes the intellectual or industrial property right of the owner or licensee, such as a trademark, this third party can be claimed responsible by the trademark owner or licensee for injunction. This is carried out in the first step by a warning letter. Hence, the infringer of the trademark is given a warning and the call to refrain from the unlawful use of the mark. Furthermore, the infringer is asked for contractual penalties reinforced in a cease and desist declaration in the case of recurrence. The purpose of this letter to the infringer is the opportunity to settle the conflict out of court. The contractual obligation to pay a penalty for any further infringements eliminates the need for further judicial protection.

If the cease and desist declaration is not signed at this early stage in the period given or to that extend required, legal aid can be claimed due to persistence of the legal interest. Hence, interim legal protection may be claimed, since the owner has a registered right such as a patent or trademark. This includes the application for injunctive relief. The judgment of the court may also be made without a hearing and, therefore, without the participation of the opponent, due to the urgency. However, the opponent may file a caveat, which will be read as an anticipated response. If there are aspects in the caveat, which may be held against the claimed interim legal protection, the court will fix a date for the hearing. After the hearing, the court will decide in the case, however, both parties have had the opportunity to present their arguments.

In the case of violation of unproven property rights, such as utility patents or designs, the approach is by way of an application for an injunction more difficult to generate. Since those rights are not proven by the office before, the plaintiff needs additional pleading on the legal validity of the property right.

Moreover, any violation of intellectual property rights or the prosecution of antitrust injunctive relief may be implemented through the latter main action.