Scandinavia: Update regarding employee inventions in Sweden

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

Scandinavia: Update regarding employee inventions in Sweden

A new collective agreement on employee inventions, negotiated between two major parties of the Swedish labour market, the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) and the Council for Negotiation and Cooperation (PTK – being a body of 25 trade unions), has recently entered into force in Sweden. The new agreement, commonly known as The Inventor Agreement, applies to employee inventions reported to the employer as of December 1 2015.

With the exception of a provision regarding an employee's right to fair compensation, Swedish legislation on employees' inventions is non-mandatory. In practice, The Inventor Agreement is the applicable legal framework for governing under what conditions the rights to patentable employee inventions are transferred to the employer. The agreement applies to those parties bound by the agreement, being a significant proportion of Swedish companies engaged in R&D.

Although the re-negotiated agreement to a large extent is identical to the former agreement, a few notable changes have been made.

Firstly, significantly higher compensation levels to employees are recommended and have been linked to an officially indexed amount established yearly. This year's recommended minimum amount is approximately €2,200. Furthermore, the ultimate time limit for initiating legal action to solve a dispute concerning compensation has been changed to being calculated 10 years from the patent application date, rather than 10 years from the reporting date of an invention to the employer. A new special arbitration tribunal to settle disputes regarding compensation has been established and a possibility to request a maximum of four years stay of proceedings has been introduced in order to facilitate the establishment of a disputed invention's value. A final novelty worth mentioning is that unlike other arbitration tribunals, summaries of the arbitration awards will be made publicly available, thus providing some kind of case law from these cases.

Eilenberg

Marcus Eilenberg


ZaccoArne Jacobsens Alle 15DK-2300 Copenhagen S DenmarkTel: +45 39 48 80 00Fax: +45 39 48 80 80contact@zacco.comwww.zacco.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

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
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Gift this article