Europe: UPC court fees announced
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

Europe: UPC court fees announced

At the end of February the Preparatory Committee for the Unified Patent Court announced the definitive proposal for court fees for the UPC, which is planned to start in early 2017.

The most striking change with respect to the previous proposal is that the costs for registering an opt-out are set to zero. The argument of the Preparatory Committee for doing so was, next to the many requests from the profession, that registration and checking for payment would complicate the opt-out procedure. This procedure now is a simple filling of the required data in the automated registration system of the Court.

The other fees of the Court follow the original proposal, to the effect that filing cases for infringement or declaration for non-infringement involve a fixed fee of €11,000 and a value-based fee that can vary between €0 and €325,000. The value of the case should be calculated in the simplest way, for example by reference to an appropriate licence fee. Filing a revocation action only is subject to a fixed fee of €20,000.

There will be a 40% reduction for SMEs or micro-entities if they meet certain criteria. Court fees may be partially reimbursed for simpler procedures, such as when cases are heard by one judge, withdrawn or settled.

The value of the case also determines the ceiling of the recoverable costs, which may be awarded to the winning party.

For both the recoverable costs and the court fees there is leeway for the court to adjust the levels to the nature of the parties. If and how the cost structure favours non-practising entities (patent trolls) is difficult to predict. Possibly, they inadvertently profit from the arrangements that are applicable to SMEs.

More details and a full disclosure of the complete cost structure can be found on the website of the Preparatory Committee unified-patent-court.org.

Bart van Wezenbeek


V.O.Johan de Wittlaan 72517 JR The HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Data from Managing IP+’s Talent Tracker shows US firms making major swoops for IP teams, while South Korea has also been a buoyant market
The finalists for the 13th annual awards have been announced
Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Loes van den Winkel, attorney at Arnold & Siedsma, explains why clients' enthusiasm is contagious and why her job does not mean managing fashion models
Allen & Gledhill partner Jia Yi Toh shares her experience of representing the winning team in the first-ever case filed under Singapore’s new fast-track IP dispute resolution system
In-house lawyers reveal how they balance cost, quality, and other criteria to get the most from their relationships with external counsel
Dario Pietrantonio of Robic discusses growth opportunities for the firm and shares insights from his journey to managing director
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Gift this article