Spain: Strategies for plant protection

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

Cookies Settings

Spain: Strategies for plant protection

The tension in the relationship between patent rights and plant breeder's rights (PBR) is widely known. Recently, some EU member states have opposed the decision taken by the Enlarged Board of Appeals of the European Patent Office (EPO) in cases G2/12 and G2/13 .

G2/12 and G2/13 concluded that plants obtained by an essentially biological process, excluded from patentability according to Article 53(b) EPC, are not excluded from patentability, but in December 2016 the EPO decided to stay all proceedings in examination and opposition cases in which the invention was a plant or animal obtained by an essentially biological process. This decision was taken following the discussion on the recent Notice of the European Commission related to the exclusion from patentability of said plants interpreted from the Biopatent Directive (98/44/EC) and supported by Spain jointly with Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.

If finally the EPO follows the interpretation offered by the European Commission Notice, PBRs would be the main route of the protection of plants derived from essentially biological processes.

In order to obtain PBRs, the plant material must be novel, distinct, stable and homogeneous, but also it must be assigned a valid variety denomination. Since time elapsed between the application date and the grant of PBRs, it is advisable to protect this denomination simultaneously as a trade mark but taking into account proceeding of the Guidelines established by the Community and national regulations. At European Community level, at the time the PBR is granted, the trade mark will be annulled since the variety denomination would be generic. Nevertheless, the breeder would have the exclusive right to prevent third parties with an identical or similar denomination during this period. At national level, in Spain, according to the Article 48.4 of the Law No 3/2000, the applicant must undertake to waive the Spanish trade mark rights at the time the PBR is granted.

It is also remarkable that, according to article 19 of the Spanish Regulation (Real Decreto) No 1261/2005 which approves the regulation of protection of plant varieties, it is necessary to register in the corresponding Spanish Ministry a Community plant variety licence contract to ensure that infringements of the corresponding national PBRs are equally applicable to infringements of the Community PBRs. From 2005, the licences of exploitation of PBRs have shown a clear and surprising upward movement, indicating that the PBRs generated by the breeding sector are growing strongly in this country.

Rafa Lopez

Esther Rubio


PONS IPGlorieta Rubén Darío, 428010 – Madrid SpainTel: +34 917007600Fax: +34 913086103clientes@pons.eswww.ponsip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
AI can exploit longstanding gaps in copyright protection at remarkable speed, but EU law still provides tools to fight back, says Simon Hembt at Bird & Bird
The firm has tapped a local patent trio to establish a foothold in the market and broaden its national presence
New Asia-Pacific IP head Jonathan Chu is eyeing opportunities arising from Chinese technology licensing, overseas enforcement and increasingly IP-heavy cross-border deals
Europe’s largest intellectual property convention and trade fair is back: IP Service World 2026 takes place in Munich from November 23–25 – the 16th edition, with 1,400-plus attendees from 55-plus nations, 100-plus speakers, and 100-plus exhibitors. Three days. Two focused areas. One IP marketplace.
Mehmet Gün and Uğur Aktekin discuss four decades of change in Türkiye’s legal market, the firm’s commitment to independence and the challenge of building an institution that can outlast its founders
Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
Gift this article