The United Kingdom’s ratification process of the Unified Patent Court…nearly there!

Encouraging steps by participating member states towards the entry into force of the UPC Agreement

Last week, on 14th May, the Intellectual Property Act 2014 enabling the Secretary of State to make arrangements to establish the Unified Patent Court in the UK (See section 17 of the Act) was given the Royal Assent.

 

The Bill had been initiated by the House of Lords, which approved it in July 2013, followed by the House of Commons in March 2014.

 

It is now expected that the IP Act’s provisions will start to come into force from 1 October 2014, with all measures implemented by late 2015.

 

This new step towards the ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement is especially important as the United Kingdom is one of the three countries, with France and German, which must ratify the UPC Agreement for it to come into effect.

A referendum in Denmark to join the UPC

Encouraging steps by participating member states towards the entry into force of the UPC Agreement

Danes will vote in May 2014 on whether or not to join the EU’s Unified Patent Court.

 As Denmark has an opt-out from EU legislation on justice, more than 80% of MPs have to support Denmark joining the Unified Patent Court. If the government fails to gather such support it must call a referendum.

However, while the Danish centre-left government is in favour of joining the Unified Patent Court, the anti-EU parties in the parliament, the semi-communist Red-Green Alliance and the right-wing nationalist Danish People’s Party, have been blocking an agreement.

The Danish People’s Party (right-wing nationalist party) had demanded that the government either set up new rules for EU migrants in an attempt to avoid ‘benefits tourism’ or promise a referendum on the banking union, which Denmark, as a non-euro country, still has to decide on, in return for backing the Unified Patent Court.

In August, Danish opposition leader Lars Løkke Rasmussen told Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt to give the Danish People’s Party “whatever it takes” to get the party to support the patent court. However, on December 19th 2013 Danish Minister for EU Affairs Nick Hækkerup confirmed that a referendum would take place on 25 May 2014, the same day as the European Parliament elections in Denmark.

The Unified Patent Court and the «Malta problem»

One of the many challenges the UPC faces and which is currently the subject of questions and debates is the impact of the ratification of the European Patent Convention by member states on the UPC Agreement, or what is commonly called “the Malta problem”.  The UPC Blog would like here to introduce the main elements of the debate and open the topic to discussion.

 

The European Patent Convention was signed on 5 October 1973 and entered into force in 1977 for seven countries (Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Netherland and the United Kingdom). Malta on the contrary is a late-comer to the European Patent Convention and only joined on 1 March 2007, which means that European patent applications filed before 1 March 2007 are not valid in Malta by virtue of Article 79 (1) EPC. However, assuming that Malta ratifies the Unified Patent Court Agreement, its late ratification of the EPC will have direct consequences for the Unitary Patent at the scale of Europe.

 

Article 3(1) of regulation 1257/2012 requires in fact for the unitary effect “a European Patent granted with the same set of claims in respect of all the participating Member States”. The same article further states that “a European Patent granted with different sets of claims for different participating Member States shall not benefit from unitary effect.” Malta having been a member of the EPC since only 1 March 2007, any European Patent application filed before that date will not get a grant valid for Malta. Hence the granted European Patent will not have the same set of claims in all participating member states, since it would have a valid claim set for some states and no set at all for Malta.

 

This situation of course seems absurd: assuming that Malta ratifies the Agreement in a timely fashion it would appear that no European patent application filed before 1 March 2007 could be eligible to become a Unitary Patent.

 

One could argue that this is not really a problem since it will resolve itself. In fact, most applications will at some point have a filing date situated after 1 March 2007, and will thus be eligible. However, this problem will not in the future be limited to Malta. In fact what about new and future EU members? As for example Croatia, which joined the EU on 1 July 2013 and joined the EPC as recently as 1 January 2008, after being an extension state from 1 April 2004. As an EU member, Croatia is now able to opt in to the Unitary Patent package. So, if Croatia ratifies the Agreement, the same problem will apply, except that the cut-off date will now be 1 January 2008.

Other recent EPC-joiners that aren’t yet EU members are Norway (EPC since 1 January 2008), Albania (EPC since 1 May 2010), Macedonia (EPC since 1 January 2009), Serbia (EPC since 1 October 2010), and San Marino (EPC since 1 July 2009). Any of these joining the EU in the near future, and becoming Member States of the unitary patent, would shift the cut-off date even later.

It thus seems to the UPC Blog that the Unified Patent Court will have to decide between three possible interpretations of article 3 (1) of regulation 1257/2012.

 

The first interpretation would be a literal interpretation of article 3 (1) which would have for consequence that no European Patent with Unitary effect could be delivered for European Patents granted before 2007. This interpretation seems of course to be very unlikely.

 

The second interpretation would consider that if a European patent is not available in a country, the Unified Patent Court should then ignore that country rather than disqualify the Unitary Patent. The requirement of a European Patent “granted with the same set of claims in respect of all the participating Member States” could hence be read as follows: in all participating Member States for which the patent is granted, it should have the same claims. But if the patent is not granted in a particular member state at all, the only effect is that it will not be included in the unitary effect. To a certain extent this will happen anyway. In fact, not all member states will ratify the UPC Agreement at the same time. So a European Patent with Unitary Effect obtained a few years after the Unified Patent Court Agreement enters into force will very probably concern more countries than a European Patent with Unitary Effect granted early 2015 (assuming that the UPC Agreement comes into force in early 2015 as planned by the UPC preparatory committee).

 

Finally, the third interpretation of article 3 (1) would require the Court to ignore the date of entry into force of the European Patent Convention. This interpretation would mean that a European Patent which could not have been filed for Malta before 2007 could get unitary effect on the basis of a European Patent with Unitary Effect much older than 2007. This situation would however affect third parties who may have relied on the fact that Malta was not covered by a European Patent before 2007.

 

The UPC Blog awaits your thoughts, comments and questions on the “Malta problem”.

 

 

 

 

Belgium and France are getting closer to ratification

Encouraging steps by participating member states towards the entry into force of the UPC Agreement

Belgium is now one step closer to the ratification of the UPC Agreement. In fact a draft bill, instigated by the Ministers of Economy, Foreign Affairs and Justice, was approved on 24 October 2013 in the Council of Ministers, for the ratification of the agreement of the Unified Patent. The Council of Ministers has instructed the Minister of Foreign Affairs to carry out all necessary formalities to ratify the agreement.

Source: www.belgium.be

 

 

In France, on November 21st 2013 the French Senate adopted the bill authorizing the ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement. It had been presented to the French Council of Ministers on October 23rd 2013 and submitted to the French Senate the same day via the “accelerated procedure”. On November 21st 2013, a bill was thus submitted to the French National Assembly by the French Prime Minister on  to complete the authorization of the ratification of the Unified Patent Court.

Source: Le Monde du Droit

French Prime Minister submits bill for the Ratification of the UPC Agreement:

On October 23rd, the French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault submitted to the French Senate a bill authorizing the ratification of the UPC Agreement. It now needs to be discussed by the National Assembly (French House of Representatives) before being finally adopted. The Bill was however introduced under the “Procedure Accélérée” (expedited procedure), which limits the number of times a Bill passes between the two chambers (the Assemblée Nationale and the Sénat) and is usually used to speed up a bill’s progress. This is particularly noteworthy as France is one of the three mandatory ratification countries for the implementation of the UPC regime.

 

The bill can be found on the French Senate website.

Austria is the first Member state country to ratify the Agreement on the Unified Patent Court:

Protocol to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court on provisional application

On 7th August 2013, Austria became the first country to ratify the Agreement on the Unified Patent Court. However for the UPC Agreement to enter into force, thirteen instrument of ratification, including Germany, France and the United Kingdom are deposited.

 

France introduced a bill for the ratification of the UPC Agreement on 23rd October in the French Senate. For more information see “News: Ratification of the UPC Agreement by the French Prime Minister

 

In the United Kingdom, the UPC Agreement was laid before Parliament on 14 June 2013. The Agreement must also be given effect in UK law before it can be ratified. This will mean making changes to UK law to ensure that it complies with the provisions of the UPC Agreement. The first step of this process is provided for in the Intellectual Property Bill introduced into Parliament on 9 May 2013. Clause 17 of the IP Bill will enable the Government to make the detailed changes to UK law at a later date using secondary legislation which will be considered by both Houses of Parliament.



[1] Hyperlink