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 2026

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

In our latest podcast, Deborah Hampton talks through her hopes for the year, INTA’s patent focus, London 2026, and her love of music
Tech leads at three IP service groups discuss why firms need to move away from off-the-shelf AI products and adopt custom solutions
IP firms say they have been educating some clients on AI use, with ‘knowledge-sharing’ becoming more prevalent
As the US patent system tilts further toward favouring patent owners, firms with a strong patentee focus can get ahead of the game
Amanda Yang and Rachel Tan at Rouse and Landy Jiang at Lusheng Law Firm provide an overview of the draft amendments to China’s trademark law
News of EIP launching an AI platform and a trade secret blow for TCS in the US were also among the top talking points
The four-partner addition includes A&O Shearman’s former co-head of global IP litigation
A settlement involving Disney and another ruling concerning a lawyer’s request for access to documents were also among the big developments
Merchant & Gould's managing partner explains why the firm launched a Boston office and why it brought on board a local boutique
The model covers court-guided settlements, submissions-led determination of infringement and validity issues, and provides leeway for the court to determine a FRAND rate during negotiations
Gift this article