Why the Commission is rattled over the Unitary Patent

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Why the Commission is rattled over the Unitary Patent

There is lots happening in Munich this week, as member state representatives gather on Bob-van-Benthem-Platz for a meeting of the Administrative Council on Wednesday. But while much of the focus on the EPO centres on industrial relations and governance issues, there are important Unitary Patent developments taking place too

epo20headquarters20in20munich.jpg

Today members of the select committee of the Admin Council tasked with setting application and renewal fees for the new patent begin their latest two-day meeting.

It is their first since the EPO floated two fee proposals earlier this month. Its so-called TOP4 and TOP5 proposals are based on, respectively, the cost of validating European patents in the most popular four or five member states.

The decision about how much it will cost to apply for and maintain a Unitary Patent was always going to be contentious, since those setting the levels have to reconcile a number of interests – including their own.

Industry has long-championed low fees (no surprise there). But now it seems that IP owners’ unwillingness to use the new system if the figures don’t stack up in their favour has got European Commission officials rattled.

On Friday we reported that senior members of DG Internal Market had shared with the EPO “in no uncertain terms” its view that the level of renewal fees is critical for the success of the system. (You can read more about what officials told us here).

After spending more than 40 years trying to get a pan-European patent right in place, it is easy to understand the bureaucrats’ frustration that it might be stymied from the start by member states keen to maximise their own financial share. The Commission enjoys merely observer status at the select committee meetings. But it is intriguing to think about what its representatives will be saying to member states during the coffee breaks.

Only 30% of our content is published on our blog – to access all of our content you need to be a subscriber. We like to offer our loyal blog readers a special rate, so register your interest in a subscription and we will be in touch shortly.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
A boom in transactional work and a heightened awareness of IP have helped boost revenue for the rebranded commercial services team
Clemens Heusch, head of global litigation and dispute resolution at Nokia, tells us why open conversations – and respectful challenges – lead to the best results
Siegmund Gutman, who joined Mintz one year ago, explains the firm’s approach to life sciences litigation and what it means for hiring plans
The merger of two IP boutiques could prompt others to follow suit and challenge Australia’s externally funded firms
Gift this article