Paris gets unitary patent central court, London and Munich to hear sector-specific cases
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Paris gets unitary patent central court, London and Munich to hear sector-specific cases

EU member states have finally agreed where the courts for a new unitary patent system in Europe are to be based. Paris is to be home to the central division while two so-called thematic clusters are to be set up in the UK and Germany: Munich will host mechanical engineering cases and London chemistry (including pharmaceuticals) and human necessities

The deal was thrashed out at today’s meeting of the EU Council, made up of heads of governments of member states.

There had been speculation earlier in the daythat no deal would be reached after Chancellor Merkel, Prime Minister Cameron and President Hollande clashed over the location of the central division.

But a document detailing the conclusions of the meeting, issued by the Council, said that Paris will host the Central Division of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) as well as the office of the president of the Court of First Instance. The first president will come from France.

The statement went on to say that thematic clusters will be set up in two sections of the central division. One, in London, will deal with patent disputes related to chemistry (including pharmaceuticals) and human necessities while the other, in Munich, will deal with disputes over mechanical engineering cases.

The Council described the three-way split as being prompted by “the highly specialised nature of patent litigation and the need to maintain high quality standards”. Seasoned EU observers, however, may believe it had more to do with backroom deals between the leaders of three of the most powerful countries in the EU.

In an important detail of the deal, the Council document says it “suggests” deleting controversial articles of the proposed Regulation which were set to give the Court of Justice of the EU the right to hear appeals relating to substantive patent law issues.

For many critics of the unitary patent package, the inclusion of these Articles 6-8 would add time and uncertainty to litigation brought under the new system. However, removing them raises questions about the constitutionality of any agreementto which the EU itself is a party.

It remains to be seen whether these articles will remain in the agreement and what provisions, if any, will replace them.

The Council also provided limited details about the procedures for bringing unitary patent cases before the courts.

It said member states had agreed that parties will have the choice of bringing an infringement action before the central division is the defendant is based outside the EU. If a revocation action is already pending before the central division the patent holder should have the chance to bring an infringement action to the central division.

Defendants will not be able to request a transfer of an infringement case from a local division to the central division if the defendant is based in the EU.

Managing IP will be carrying more details about the unitary patent package deal and reactions to it later today.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Pham Nghiem Xuan Bac, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Counsel explain how pricing flexibility, patent agents and being business partners can help them maintain profitable patent prosecution practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Speakers at an INTA event weighed in on why firms should create AI use policies and how they stay on top of the latest developments
The England and Wales Court of Appeal backed Lidl in its trademark dispute with Tesco, but we should pay more attention to how we rule on first-instance decisions
Richard Kempner, partner at Haseltine Lake Kempner, discusses the ‘remarkable’ comments from judges, despite the court finding against his client Tesco on the bulk of issues
Gift this article