EPO president: UK’s UPC withdrawal 'not a decisive blow'

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

EPO president: UK’s UPC withdrawal 'not a decisive blow'

 Antonio Campinos

Antonio Campinos said it was a “great pity” that the UK would no longer be part of the UPC but that the system would remain attractive

EPO president Antonio Campinos has conceded that the proposed unitary patent may appear less attractive without the UK, but has insisted that with the political will to make it happen the project can still be a success.

Describing the UK government’s decision to no longer seek membership of the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) as a “great pity”, Campinos said: “Some will say the decision is a blow to the whole system, but is it a decisive blow? No.”

He added: “Yes, no longer having the UK as a member may make it less attractive but it still has huge benefits to offer, especially when you consider the economic benefits and the potential reach. Whether it has 25, 22 or 20 member states, the UPC makes sense.”

Campinos was speaking at Managing IP’s International Patent Forum in London today.

The UK government’s admission last week that it no longer wanted to be a part of the UPC could be a major blow to the proposed system. A spokesperson for the prime minister’s office said that joining a system that has oversight from the Court of Justice of the EU was “inconsistent” with its aim of being a “self-governing nation.”

A pending complaint in Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court could yet throw more doubt over the project. A judgment is expected in that case in the next month or so.

Legally there is also doubt over the UPC’s future as the UK, France and Germany are all required to ratify the project before it can come into force.

Campinos added that although people could now find ways not to pursue the UPC, with the right political will and support there are also “1,000 reasons” why it should continue.

Campinos, who took over as EPO president from Benoît Battistelli in 2018, also spoke of the importance of harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) in the EPO’s everyday work.

Despite the EPO decision to reject a patent application listing AI as an inventor, Campinos predicted that this is a subject that will come under much discussion in the coming years.  

“We can expect to see more of these applications,” he said, adding: “These are challenges we are going to have to face.”

AI will also be used to assist EPO staff in their everyday work, Campinos suggested, adding that AI assistance will be used by examiners as part of the office’s commitment to quality.  



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Boies Schiller Flexner joins forces with Grünecker to target Skechers in Europe following US lawsuit
Helen Mutimer discusses how the firm’s IP advisory services are filling a gap in the market, and why life sciences work is soaring
In major recent developments, a confidentiality request was rejected, Samsung and its representative A&O Shearman secured a partial win, and EIP made a new hire
Tomas Wässingbo joins us for our ‘Five minutes with’ series to explain why he wants to change the perception around designs
PepsiCo was represented by PwC, while the Australian Taxation Office was advised by Australian-headquartered law firm MinterEllison
The firm said revenue from its ‘refreshed and expanded’ IP team increased by 4% in FY25
As revenue reporting season hits full stride, firms have made a point of highlighting the successes of their IP teams as they take centre stage in big-ticket work
GSK and CureVac will together receive $740 million, as well as royalties on sales of COVID-19 vaccines in the US
The firm, which represented Getty in one of the most closely followed copyright cases in recent years, said IP was among its standout practice areas
The decision to divide was partly due to differing visions over the impact of technology on IP work, according to one partner
Gift this article