Lehne on the unitary patent: deleting articles 6-8 is not acceptable

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Lehne on the unitary patent: deleting articles 6-8 is not acceptable

MEPs will not back a system of pan-European patent litigation that does not give the Court of Justice of the EU a role in deciding what constitutes infringement of a unitary patent, says Klaus-Heiner Lehne, chair of the Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee

Last week senior European Commission official Kerstin Jorna told Managing IP she believed member states and MEPs were considering ways of compromising on the issue, which threatens to derail plans to introduce a unitary patent for Europe along with a system for litigating it.

Before Parliament’s summer recess, the Council of Ministers agreed to support the Commission’s proposals for a unitary patent package, but recommended that MEPs remove Articles 6 to 8 from the draft regulation. These articles explain what constitutes direct and indirect infringement of a unitary patent and the limits on rights conferred by the patent. The Court of Justice would be given the final say on how the articles would be interpreted.

MEPs responded angrily, accusing member states of reneging on an informal agreement on the content of the patent regulation that the two sides had reached in December.

Although Jorna suggested the two sides may be looking for a compromise solution, Lehne, who chairs the influential Legal Affairs Committee and is Parliament’s rapporteur on the unitary patent proposals, said MEPs would not support a plan to remove the articles.

“I do not want to speculate on the specifics of a possible compromise, but for me it is quite clear that a simple deletion of the Articles 6-8 will not be acceptable to the European Parliament,” he told Managing IP by email.

The Legal Affairs Committee is set to discuss the unitary patent at its meeting on October 11 but will not be taking a vote.

In principle, if Parliament votes in favour of a different text to that agreed by the Council, the file would have to go to a second reading, said Lehne, adding: “I would prefer if the Council would propose a workable compromise.”

The German MEP, who is a partner of law firm Taylor Wessing, declined to say whether he believed it preferable to reject the unitary package as a whole rather than have a system that does not give the EU’s highest court a role in interpreting the law governing it.

“What is important is that we find a solution which ensures that the patent regulation is in conformity to EU-law,” he said.

The latest draft agreement on a Unified Patent Court and draft Statute was published by the Cypriot presidency of the EU on Thursday. The main changes to the document reflect positions agreed by the Council of Ministers in June. The document will be discussed by a meeting of the Friends of the Presidency group on October 5.

You can read more about Klaus-Heiner Lehne in Managing IP's 2012 list of the 50 most influential people in IP.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Licensing chief Patrik Hammarén also reveals that the company will rename its IPR business to better reflect its role in defining standards
The acquisition of Pecher & Partners follows the firm’s earlier expansion into litigation to create a ‘one-stop shop’
News of Via Licensing Alliance launching its first semiconductor patent pool and INTA electing a new president were also among the top talking points
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL Americas Awards by January 23
The 2026 Life Sciences EMEA Awards is now open for entries. We are looking forward to reviewing and celebrating the industry's most impressive achievements and landmarks from the past year.
The tie-up between Perkins Coie and Ashurst may generate some striking numbers, but independent IP firms need not worry yet, according to practitioners
Perkins Coie’s US patent prosecution strength could provide Ashurst with an opportunity to enter an untapped market in Australia, but it may not be easy
Mitesh Patel at Reed Smith outlines why the US Copyright Office and courts have so far dismissed AI authorship and how inventors can protect AI-generated works
Xia Zheng, founder of AFD China, discusses balancing legal work with BD, new approaches to complex challenges, and the dangers of ‘over-optimism’
A dispute involving semiconductor technology and a partner's move from Hoffman Eitle to Hoyng Rokh Monegier were also among the top talking points
Gift this article