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

Cookies Settings

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

The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
AI can exploit longstanding gaps in copyright protection at remarkable speed, but EU law still provides tools to fight back, says Simon Hembt at Bird & Bird
The firm has tapped a local patent trio to establish a foothold in the market and broaden its national presence
New Asia-Pacific IP head Jonathan Chu is eyeing opportunities arising from Chinese technology licensing, overseas enforcement and increasingly IP-heavy cross-border deals
Europe’s largest intellectual property convention and trade fair is back: IP Service World 2026 takes place in Munich from November 23–25 – the 16th edition, with 1,400-plus attendees from 55-plus nations, 100-plus speakers, and 100-plus exhibitors. Three days. Two focused areas. One IP marketplace.
Mehmet Gün and Uğur Aktekin discuss four decades of change in Türkiye’s legal market, the firm’s commitment to independence and the challenge of building an institution that can outlast its founders
Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
Gift this article