France: Confidentiality obligations and SPC update

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: Confidentiality obligations and SPC update

In June 2015, in a case concerning patent validity, the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) issued a decision (Cass Com 13-15.862) relating to confidentiality obligations to prevent any risk of public disclosure in an inter partes relationship:

i) Contrarily to what was mentioned in previous decisions rendered by courts of appeal, the Supreme Court decided that a confidentiality obligation could not be implied in commercial or business relationships between parties.

ii) To be valid, a confidentiality clause does not need to be in writing.

iii) An ownership clause – such as the usual "The transmitted documents are the ownership of the sender and cannot be transmitted" – should not be equated to a confidentiality clause.

In view of the above, I want to highlight the necessity of drafting written confidentiality clauses and the use of a corresponding "Confidential" mark on the documents they relate to.

In September 2015, the Tribunal de Grande instance of Montpellier issued a first instance decision (17.09.2015 RG2013/05047) in a case where the contractual relationship between the parties was based on an oral agreement or a so-called gentlemen's agreement concerning product development including exclusivity owed by the consultant for all projects retained by the creator.

According to the decision:

a) The protection of trade secrets is one of the consequences given to the consultancy agreement by equity, usage or law.

b) Scientific or technical information that result from the collaboration with a consultant are not considered information belonging to the public domain.

c) The use of trade secrets by the consultant to develop his own product or commissioned by a third party is a breach of contractual obligations of loyalty and confidentiality.

Impact of CJEU Seattle Genetics decision

The French Patent Office has confirmed that the new rule for calculating the duration of SPCs also applies to SPCs under examination.

For the already granted SPCs, the FPO can neither modify the granting decision, nor correct the term of the SPC. For informative purposes only, the patentee has the possibility to proceed with a registration in the French Patent Register in order to inform third parties about the date on which the marketing authorisation has been notified.

kohn.jpg

Philippe Kohn


Gevers & Ores41, avenue de FriedlandParis 75008, FranceTel: +33 1 45 00 48 48Fax: +33 1 40 67 95 67paris@gevers.euwww.gevers.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Managing IP speaks with up-and-coming women lawyers at five law firms about fighting imposter syndrome, maintaining work-life balance and why real representation matters
Kilpatrick’s managing partner for San Francisco discusses taking the longer route to partnership, the importance of female mentors, and strengthening office culture
Home-working and grace periods at IP offices have been announced, while Managing IP understands Iran’s IP office is out of service
With INTA 2026 just two months away, London-based IP practitioners offer tips on making the most out of the city
New platform, which covers SEPs for the Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 7 standards, includes 10 patent owners
The Texas-based IP litigation hires take King & Spalding’s partner appointments from pre-merger Winston & Strawn up to 12 this year
Sunny Su explains how her team overcame challenges with orchard evidence collection to secure a favourable plant variety decision from China’s top court
Flexible working firm continues trajectory from 2025 with appointment of Matthew Grant and Letao Qin
Anousha Davies, associate and trademark attorney at Birketts, unpicks how the university’s reputation enabled it to see off a proposed trademark for ‘Cambridge Rowing’
IP lawyers, who say they are encouraging clients to build up ‘tariff resilience’, should treat the risks posed by recent orders as a core consideration in cross-border licensing
Gift this article