Greece: Patent system moves towards substantive examination

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

Greece: Patent system moves towards substantive examination

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
lianhao-qu-lfan1gswv5c-unsplash.jpg

Constantinos Kilimiris of Patrinos & Kilimiris explains how a recent amendment in the provisions of the Greek patent law resolves a long-standing issue which prevented amending applications

The Greek patent system is one that does not provide for substantive examination of patent applications. A national patent application will receive formalities examination and, upon payment of the search fees, a search report on prior art will be provided with the option of obtaining a reasoned opinion from the examiner. The patent will be granted, upon payment of the grant fees, and the search report will be published together with the granted patent.

The validity of such patents can be challenged at court by any third party either in nullity proceedings, or as a defense, in infringement proceedings. In this way, substantive examination on patentability is in practice deferred until a patent is actually litigated and the court will have the chance to rule on patentability on the basis of the search report and opinion accompanying the granted patent.

One of the problems arising with the above patent system was that, upon receipt of the search report, the applicant did not have the possibility to amend his application in order to address the examiner’s objections based on the prior art cited.

This problem has now been resolved with a recent amendment in the provisions of the Greek patent law (1733/87). According to the new provisions, the applicant now has the possibility, within three months from receipt of the search report, to limit his application by submitting amendments in the claims and description addressing the prior art cited.

The examiner will consider the amended claims and draft a final search report that will be published with the granted patent.

While the recent amendments in the patent law still do not provide for substantive examination, they do provide the applicant with the possibility of limiting his application and obtaining a favourable search report, without the need to do so in litigation proceedings.

This seems to take a step towards the introduction of a long-awaited substantive examination patent system in Greece.

 

Constantinos KilimirisPartner, Patrinos & KilimirisE: ckilimiris@patrinoskilimiris.com

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