Lydia Lundstedt

Lydia Lundstedt

Postdoktor i Internationell privaträtt

Visa sidan på svenska
Works at Department of Law
Telephone 08-16 31 92
Visiting address Universitetsvägen 10 C
Room C 794
Postal address Juridiska institutionen 106 91 Stockholm

About me

I am a postdoctoral fellow and senior lecturer in private international law at Stockholm University. Since 2019, I am the editor of the book series Scandinavian Studies in Law, which is affiliated with the Faculty of Law at Stockholm University.

Academic background

In 2016, I defended my dissertation "Territoriality in Intellectual Property Law" with Professor Marianne Levin as supervisor at the Department of Law at Stockholm University. In August 2018, I was permanently employed as a Senior Lecturer in Business Law with a focus on intellectual property law at the Department of Economic and Industrial Development at Linköping University. In December 2018, I was permanently employed as a Senior Lecturer in International Private and Procedural Law at the Department of Law at Stockholm University. In 2019, I received a post-doc scholarship from the Foundation for Jurisprudential Research.

Academic positions of trust

Deputy, Education Committee (2021-2023)

Community Cooperation

  • Adjunct member and head of the Transborder Group for the Swedish Association for Intellectual Property Law (SFIR) (2017 - )
  • Member of reference group at the Expert Group on Public Economics (ESO) on the legal conditions for individually owned data for more efficient healthcare in Sweden, given the EU's new general data protection regulation (2018/01 - 2018/05)
  • Member of VINNOVA's expert group on “Håkan Lans and the US cases regarding the patent for color graphics (the‘ 986 patent) ”(2006/08 - 2007/05)


I teach private international law, intellectual property law, contract law and American law. I supervise students writing masters theses and doctoral students.


My research focuses on the interface between private international law and intellectual property law and other related areas. My dissertation “Territoriality in Intellectual Property Law” (2016) examined and compared the interpretation and application of the principle of territoriality in cross-border intellectual property infringement disputes in the EU and US legal systems. I am currently working on a project on the private international law aspects of cross-border trade secret disputes. The project is funded by the Foundation for Jurisprudential Research.


A selection from Stockholm University publication database
  • 2016. Lydia Lundstedt, Marianne Levin, Marcus Norrgård.

    The principle of territoriality is a truism in intellectual property (IP) law. A premise underlying the principle is the right of each state to determine the extent to which IP rights exist and are protected within its own territory to fulfil its own economic, social and cultural policy goals. This is done by giving a right to prevent others from doing within the protected territory any of the acts that are exclusively reserved to the right holder under the IP statute that granted or protects the IP right. The principle of territoriality informs that IP rights granted or protected by a state are independent from those granted or protected by other states, and that the rights conferred under each state’s IP law are limited to the territory of that state. As the principle of territoriality neatly allocated jurisdiction among states on a territorial basis, it purportedly obviated the need for private international law. Each state exercised jurisdiction over the infringement of its own rights and applied its own domestic IP law, which served the interests of the states and of the parties.

    With the increase in the protection and exploitation of IP rights across national borders, infringements do not remain within hermetically sealed national territories. Acts taken in one state can have effects in other states and impair the policies that the rights were designed to fulfil. This raises questions concerning the territorial scope of application of the domestic IP law, that is, whether it is interpreted with respect to a domestic tangible act, effects on a domestic policy goal or both. In addition, the transborder exploitation of IP rights raises questions of private international law with respect to whether states exercise jurisdiction and apply national law to disputes concerning infringements of their domestic rights or whether states exercise jurisdiction and apply national law to disputes arising from acts committed in their territories (or both). These determinations may depend on different factors such as the different interests taken into consideration (e.g. state or party interests), the different legal traditions upon which the legal systems are based and the characteristics and functions of the IP rights themselves.

    This dissertation compares the interpretation and operation of the principle of territoriality of IP law in the private law resolution of transborder IP infringement disputes in the legal systems of the European Union and the United States, two distinctly different legal systems that have significant trade and investment relations with each other. The comparison shows that while the systems are functionally similar, the principle of territoriality is interpreted and operates somewhat differently in the two legal systems.

  • 2012. Lydia Lundstedt. NIR 1, 6-25
  • 2008. Lydia Lundstedt. NIR 2, 122-139
  • 2007. Lydia Lundstedt. Nordiskt immateriellt rättsskydd 76 (4), 348-364
  • 2001. Lydia Lundstedt. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Internationaler Teil 50 (2), 103-111
  • 2001. Lydia Lundstedt. IIC-International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law 32 (2), 124-141

    In a recent decision, the Swedish Supreme Court has denied jurisdiction in respect of a claim for declaration of non-infringement of a Swedish patent against a Norwegian company. The article examines the decision in the light of the Brussels and Lugano Conventions, taking into account previous case law of the European Court of Justice. It arrives at the conclusion that there is no clearly fixed solution for the problems at hand, but that the relevant articles of the Conventions should be interpreted differently depending on the nature of the case.

  • 2003. Lydia Lundstedt, Ulf Maunsbach. NIR 3, 212-225
  • 2002. Lydia Lundstedt. Immaterialrätt och sakrätt
  • 2007. Marianne Levin, Lydia Lundstedt.
  • 2018. Lydia Lundstedt. IIC-International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law, 1-26

    This paper analyses what the decision in Bolagsupplysningen and Ilsjan (C-194/16) means for international jurisdiction under EU Regulation No 1215/2012 with respect to transborder intellectual property infringement disputes. In this case, the Court of Justice of the European Union extended “the centre of interests” basis of jurisdiction under Art. 7(2) of EU Regulation No 1215/2012 to legal persons claiming infringements of personality rights on the internet. The Court also held that actions for rectification and removal of content infringing personality rights may not be brought before the courts of a Member State where the content is accessible. This article concludes that the centre of interests basis of jurisdiction is generally not applicable to right holders claiming infringements of intellectual property rights and/or complementary tort claims, except arguably for claims for the infringement of moral rights and unfair competition claims where the act exclusively affects the interests of a specific competitor. Many questions remain with respect to the localisation of a victim’s centre of interests. In addition, the article concludes that the judgment in Bolagsupplysningen does not affect a right holder’s ability to obtain an injunction in the Member State in which content accessible on the internet infringes a forum IP right to put an end to the infringement in that State. Still, the centre of interests basis of jurisdiction has the potential to give right holders an advantage for claims of online infringements of moral rights and acts of unfair competition that exclusively affect them and it can be expected that authors and traders will take advantage of this opportunity when considering their IP litigation strategies.

Show all publications by Lydia Lundstedt at Stockholm University

Last updated: December 1, 2020

Bookmark and share Tell a friend