France: Confidentiality obligations and SPC update

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

France: Confidentiality obligations and SPC update

In June 2015, in a case concerning patent validity, the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) issued a decision (Cass Com 13-15.862) relating to confidentiality obligations to prevent any risk of public disclosure in an inter partes relationship:

i) Contrarily to what was mentioned in previous decisions rendered by courts of appeal, the Supreme Court decided that a confidentiality obligation could not be implied in commercial or business relationships between parties.

ii) To be valid, a confidentiality clause does not need to be in writing.

iii) An ownership clause – such as the usual "The transmitted documents are the ownership of the sender and cannot be transmitted" – should not be equated to a confidentiality clause.

In view of the above, I want to highlight the necessity of drafting written confidentiality clauses and the use of a corresponding "Confidential" mark on the documents they relate to.

In September 2015, the Tribunal de Grande instance of Montpellier issued a first instance decision (17.09.2015 RG2013/05047) in a case where the contractual relationship between the parties was based on an oral agreement or a so-called gentlemen's agreement concerning product development including exclusivity owed by the consultant for all projects retained by the creator.

According to the decision:

a) The protection of trade secrets is one of the consequences given to the consultancy agreement by equity, usage or law.

b) Scientific or technical information that result from the collaboration with a consultant are not considered information belonging to the public domain.

c) The use of trade secrets by the consultant to develop his own product or commissioned by a third party is a breach of contractual obligations of loyalty and confidentiality.

Impact of CJEU Seattle Genetics decision

The French Patent Office has confirmed that the new rule for calculating the duration of SPCs also applies to SPCs under examination.

For the already granted SPCs, the FPO can neither modify the granting decision, nor correct the term of the SPC. For informative purposes only, the patentee has the possibility to proceed with a registration in the French Patent Register in order to inform third parties about the date on which the marketing authorisation has been notified.

kohn.jpg

Philippe Kohn


Gevers & Ores41, avenue de FriedlandParis 75008, FranceTel: +33 1 45 00 48 48Fax: +33 1 40 67 95 67paris@gevers.euwww.gevers.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Gift this article