Changes to UK threats provisions recommended
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Changes to UK threats provisions recommended

The Law Commission has recommended reforms to the law on groundless threats of infringement proceedings in the UK, following a period of consultation

The changes affect threats of litigation for patents, trade marks and design rights but not copyright or other unregistered rights. In summary the report recommends:

  • Protection against groundless threats should be retained, but should be reformed

  • A threats action may not be brought for all threats made to a “primary actor” (as is already the case for patents)

  • It should be possible to communicate with “secondary actors” where there is a legitimate commercial purpose behind the communication and there are reasonable grounds for believing that the information provided is true.

  • For patents, it should no longer be possible to avoid liability for making threats by showing that the threatener did not know, or had no reason to suspect, that the patent was invalid.

  • A lawyer, patent or trade mark attorney should not be jointly liable for making threats when acting in their professional capacity and on client instructions.

The Commission said the recommendations “will make the law clearer, easier to follow and apply, and will ensure that the protection against groundless threats is more consistent between patents, trade marks and design rights”.

It acknowledged that there are benefits in replacing the threats provisions by a new cause of action based on unfair competition law, but said that consultees felt this was too big a change at this stage.

The Commission also said the recommendations do not address “the more fundamental issue of the uneasy relationship between UK national law and the enforcement of European and Community IP rights”.

The report does not include a draft bill, and there is no published timetable for implementing the changes.

An executive summary and the full report are available online.

Managing IP will have further analysis later this week.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The court criticised Oppo’s attempts to delay proceedings and imposed a penalty, adding that the Chinese company may need to pay more if the trial isn’t concluded this year
Miguel Hernandez explains how he secured victory for baby care company Naterra in his first oral argument before the Federal Circuit
The UPC judges are wrong – restricting access to court documents, and making parties appoint a lawyer only to have a chance of seeing them, is madness
The group, which includes the Volkswagen, Seat and Audi brands, is now licensed to use SEPs owned by more than 60 patent owners
Managing IP’s Max Walters appeared on the latest episode of ‘Two IPs in a pod’, a regular podcast hosted by the UK patent attorney body, to discuss AI, awards and more
Sources at law firms say they have spent more than three years waiting for IP regulations and explain how the delay is affecting their business
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Managing IP will host a ceremony in London on April 11 to reveal the winners of the EMEA Awards 2024
Lawyers reveal what trends they have noticed in the Western District of Texas and the advice they have been giving clients as a result
Concerns over the EU’s proposed SEP Regulation are based on little empirical support, say Benno Buehler and Kilian Mueller of Charles River Associates
Gift this article