France: PACTE Law introduces changes to French IP law

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: PACTE Law introduces changes to French IP law

The French law no. 2019-486 of May 22 2019 on business growth and transformation, known as the Action Plan for Business Growth and Transformation (PACTE) Law, introduces important changes into the French patent system, including conditions for infringement and invalidity actions for all industrial property rights.

Firstly, it will be possible to transform the application for a utility certificate into a patent application, whereas until now only the conversion of a patent into a utility certificate has been possible. Utility certificates will be issued for a 10 year period, rather than six years, from the day the application is filed.

The patent right is now subject to a full and substantive examination procedure including inventive step examination. Each criteria of patentability shall be fully examined. A one-year period is set in order to implement these amendments. These amendments will apply only to applications filed after this one-year period.

It should be noted that the PACTE Law does not provide the possibility of designating France directly in an international Patent Cooperation Treaty application.

In a nine-month period from the entering into force of the law, necessary measures will be adopted to create a patent opposition procedure in order to enable third parties to request before the French Intellectual Property Office (IPO) the revocation or modification of patents, while seeking to prevent abusive opposition procedures.

The order shall also provide the rules of appeals applicable to French IPO decisions on these oppositions.

Invalidity actions brought against patent, plant variety , design or model, or trademark rights, are no longer limited to a five-year period.

This puts an end to strong debates and contradictory decisions about the starting point of the five-year period previously applicable.

This provision applies from the publication of the law but has no effect on decisions which are final.

Until now, there was also a five-year limitation period, calculated from the last act of infringement, for starting an infringement action.

It is now stated that the limitation period for initiating the action starts from "the day the right holder knew or should have known the last fact allowing him/her to bring this action". This new calculation method applies to all IP rights.

This provision has already entered into force with no transitional provision for the ongoing cases.

The provisions of Article L 152-2 of the French Commercial Code on business secrecy have also been amended and are immediately applicable.

Finally, it is provided that the government is allowed to take by order, within six months from the enactment of this law, the necessary measures to implement the Trademark Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of December 16 2015, and to adjust the French trademark law with the new Trademark Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.

marie.jpg

Aurélia Marie

Cabinet Beau de Loménie

158, rue de l’Université

F - 75340 Paris Cedex 07 France

Tel: +33 1 44 18 89 00

Fax: +33 1 44 18 04 23

contact@bdl-ip.com

www.bdl-ip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Kevin Mack, Via’s new president, emphasises the importance of collaborative licensing structures and shares how AI tools can help create new lines of business
A Tokyo District Court ruling concerning movie spoilers, and a second chance for VLSI against Intel were also among the top talking points
Practitioners believe new AI tools at the USPTO will not replace lawyers or disrupt revenue, but instead expose where a trademark attorney’s value lies
Leighton Cassidy Legal hopes to leverage its founder's international experience and provide clients with a rare chance to receive litigation and prosecution under one umbrella
Gift this article