United Kingdom: Brexit – the EU position
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

United Kingdom: Brexit – the EU position

c963031c-805d-4f1a-9099-1548249f5b9fbrexit-min-2-final.jpg

The European Commission has issued its position paper on pan-European Union IP rights post-Brexit. As patents are not governed by the EU but come under the remit of European Patent Office, they are unaffected by Brexit and are not included in the document. Thus the EU need only concern itself with other IP rights, mainly trade marks and designs.

The Commission states that following Brexit it wishes that "the protection enjoyed in the United Kingdom on the basis of Union law by both UK and EU 27 holders of intellectual property rights having unitary character within the Union before the withdrawal date is not undermined by the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union".

Whether this will be the eventual path chosen or negotiated successfully remains to be seen.

The EU propose that EU rights granted prior to Brexit will automatically divide to create an equivalent UK right. The rights qualifying for automatic division to the UK will include: EU trade marks; registered and unregistered Community designs; protected geographical indicators, designations of origin and terms in relation to agricultural products; and Community plant variety rights. European patents are therefore totally unaffected by Brexit and are not part of the EU's considerations.

The implementation of this principle should ensure that applicable renewal dates, priority and seniority claims, genuine use requirements and reputation rules should remain the same. Moreover, implementation should not be at a cost to the holder of the right.

In terms of holders of EUTM or RCD applications pending at the date of Brexit, the Commission proposes that the holder should have the opportunity to divide their application and retain the priority date of the original EU application.

With regard to SPCs, the Commission proposes that applications filed in the UK for SPCs or the extension of their duration are completed in accordance with EU law.

The Commission considers that database rights protected under EU legislation should continue to enjoy equivalent protection in both the EU and UK post-Brexit.

Rights that have been exhausted in the EU prior to Brexit shall remain exhausted in both the EU and UK post-Brexit. The conditions for exhaustion concerning IP rights should remain those defined by EU law.

Chapman

Helga Chapman

Chapman + Co

18 Staple Gardens

Winchester SO23 8SR

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 1962 600 500  

info@chapmanip.com  

www.chapmanip.com

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Partners and other senior leaders must step up if they want diverse talent at their firms to thrive
European and US counsel reveal why they are (or aren't) concerned about patent quality and explain how external counsel can help
Firms such as Bird & Bird and Taylor Wessing have reported rising profits and highlighted the role of high-profile IP disputes and hires
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Lawyers in the corporate and IP practices discuss where the firm can steal a march on competitors, its growth plans in London, and why deal lawyers are ‘concertmasters’
Kathleen Gaynor, DEI specialist at Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick, says deliberate actions can help law firms reach diversity goals
Scott McKeown, who moved to Wolf Greenfield one year ago, says the change has helped him tap into life sciences work and advise more patent owners
The winners of our Asia-Pacific Awards 2024 will be revealed during a ceremony in Malaysia on September 26
Zach Piccolomini of Wolf Greenfield explains how to maximise your IP portfolio’s value while keeping an eye on competitors
Witnesses at a Congressional hearing debated whether reforming the ITC is necessary and considered what any changes should look like
Gift this article