UK confirms withdrawal from the Unitary Patent

Par Robert Balsters,

Announcement last week that the UK ‘will not be seeking involvement’ in the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent system is the latest blow for the much delayed EU patent, as Robert Balsters explains. 

Despite fears that Brexit would halt negotiations, the UK ratified the Unified Patent Court (UPC) agreement in April 2018. At the time, this was considered an important milestone, as the UK was one of three mandatory signatories required for the agreement to come into force. The announcement last week that the UK is withdrawing from the system could represent the end of the line for the UPC, which is also waiting on the outcome of a challenge in Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court

Short reminder: what is the Unitary Patent?

The Unitary Patent promised to facilitate the process of obtaining patent protection in the EU by simplifying and reducing many of the administrative hurdles and costs associated with obtaining patent rights across the territory. Rather than replace existing systems, such as that of the European Patent (EP) however, the Unitary Patent was designed to sit alongside them, offering businesses greater choice in their patent protection strategies. 

In general, where EU-wide coverage is required, the Unitary Patent aimed to considerably lower costs by removing the requirement to provide translations in languages of member states at the European Patent Office (EPO). The right was to come into force automatically on grant across participating member states and, unlike an EP, would not need to be validated or renewed by each member state’s patent office to enter or be kept in force.

What is the Unified Patent Court?

The Unified Patent Court seeks to eliminate the likelihood of parallel disputes involving the same patent rights in EU member states. It establishes a single patent court with the power to issue decisions on infringement (including preliminary injunctions) and validity of existing EP rights and the new Unitary Patent right. Their decisions will be binding across all contracting EU member states. 

Under the proposed Unified Patent Court system, it will be possible to commence a single action for infringement covering all signatory member states. This will apply to all patents granted by the EPO; in other words, it can be used for patents filed under both the Unitary Patent and EP systems (where the EP has been validated in EPC countries that are part of the Unitary Patent system). The risk, of course, to the patentee would be a single revocation counterclaim, which would apply throughout the Unitary Patent territories. 

When was it supposed to come into effect?

Initially, the target date for the introduction of the Unitary Patent was early 2014. This was an ambitious deadline given that judges still need to be appointed and trained, court premises still need to be found, and a great many administrative matters still needed to be undertaken before the Unitary Patent and accompanying Court system is in place. Delays have occurred as expected, and the current projection for its introduction is still to be determined, given the UK’s withdrawal and pending a challenge at Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court.

Germany’s ratification has been delayed by a constitutional complaint and it appears likely that the Constitutional Court will take some time to make its decision. Rumour has it that Germany has been waiting for Brexit and its impact on the UPC to become clear. In theory, once Germany ratifies, the system can enter into force, but now the UK has decided not to join after all, the UP/UPC system may have become much less attractive.

You can find out more about the Unitary Patent in our frequently asked questions.

Robert Balsters is a Patent Attorney at Novagraaf in Geneva.

Insights liés

Blog Nova IP Hour

[Blog] La liste des finalistes aux « European Inventor Award » dévoilée

La cérémonie du Prix de l’Inventeur Européen 2024 se déroulera à Malte le 9 juillet prochain. L’OEB vient de dévoiler la liste des douze finalistes. Comme chaque année, le public peut voter pour l’un des douze inventeurs dans le cadre du Prix du Public. Découvrez les finalistes et voter pour le prix du public.

Par Rose-Marie Ehanno,
[Blog] La liste des finalistes aux « European Inventor Award » dévoilée
Blog Nova IP Hour

[Blog] « Faute de grives je bois du merle » - Une idée marketing ingénieuse devenue contrefaçon

Le 21 février 2024, la Cour d’Appel de Paris a rendu son verdict concernant la marque de négoce « Faute de grives je bois du merle ». Clin d’œil à l’adage, ou subtile moquerie. Étaient visées les marques « Premières Grives » et « Dernières Grives », défendues vigoureusement par la société Tariquet. En effet, le domaine de Tariquet présente un quasi-monopole sur le terme « Grives » et sur la représentation de petits oiseaux ressemblants, pour désigner des vins moelleux d’IGP Côtes de Gascogne. Les deux négociants ont été condamnés pour contrefaçon et concurrence déloyale. Lire la suite

Par Novagraaf Team,
[Blog] « Faute de grives je bois du merle » - Une idée marketing ingénieuse devenue contrefaçon
Blog Nova IP Hour

[Blog] Héritiers d'Uzi Nissan récupèrent <nissan.com> et <nissan.net> après un long conflit

La société automobile Nissan a lutté pendant des années pour récupérer les noms de domaine et auprès de son titulaire, Uzi Nissan, fondateur de Nissan Computer. Elle a échoué, mais Uzi Nissan a dépensé plus de 3 millions de dollars pour combattre Nissan automobile au cours d'une bataille, de huit ans, débutée en 1999. Lire la suite

Par Marc-Emmanuel Mellet,
[Blog] Héritiers d'Uzi Nissan récupèrent <nissan.com> et <nissan.net> après un long conflit

Pour plus d'informations ou de conseils contactez-nous