Greece: Patent system moves towards substantive examination

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

Greece: Patent system moves towards substantive examination

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
lianhao-qu-lfan1gswv5c-unsplash.jpg

Constantinos Kilimiris of Patrinos & Kilimiris explains how a recent amendment in the provisions of the Greek patent law resolves a long-standing issue which prevented amending applications

The Greek patent system is one that does not provide for substantive examination of patent applications. A national patent application will receive formalities examination and, upon payment of the search fees, a search report on prior art will be provided with the option of obtaining a reasoned opinion from the examiner. The patent will be granted, upon payment of the grant fees, and the search report will be published together with the granted patent.

The validity of such patents can be challenged at court by any third party either in nullity proceedings, or as a defense, in infringement proceedings. In this way, substantive examination on patentability is in practice deferred until a patent is actually litigated and the court will have the chance to rule on patentability on the basis of the search report and opinion accompanying the granted patent.

One of the problems arising with the above patent system was that, upon receipt of the search report, the applicant did not have the possibility to amend his application in order to address the examiner’s objections based on the prior art cited.

This problem has now been resolved with a recent amendment in the provisions of the Greek patent law (1733/87). According to the new provisions, the applicant now has the possibility, within three months from receipt of the search report, to limit his application by submitting amendments in the claims and description addressing the prior art cited.

The examiner will consider the amended claims and draft a final search report that will be published with the granted patent.

While the recent amendments in the patent law still do not provide for substantive examination, they do provide the applicant with the possibility of limiting his application and obtaining a favourable search report, without the need to do so in litigation proceedings.

This seems to take a step towards the introduction of a long-awaited substantive examination patent system in Greece.

 

Constantinos KilimirisPartner, Patrinos & KilimirisE: ckilimiris@patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Sheppard has added quantum and robotics expertise to its AI industry team to help clients navigate questions around inventorship and IP infringement
The 2026 Americas ceremony recognised outstanding firms and practitioners, along with highlighting impact cases of the year
A development concerning Stephen Thaler’s AI copyright application in India and an integration between IPH group firms were also among the top talking points
As concerns around the little-known litigation tool increase, practitioners say they are educating their clients on how it can be most effective
Kilburn & Strode and Mewburn Ellis are just two firms that have invested heavily in office space – a sign that the legal industry is serious about in-person working
In major recent developments, Dyson snagged another win against Hong Kong-based competitor Dreame and a new AI-powered UPC platform was launched
Mohit and Sidhant Goel decided not to pursue an interim injunction application so that their client, Communications Components Antenna, could benefit from a fast-track trial
Anita Cade, head of Ashurst’s IP and media team in Australia, discusses why law firms that can pull together capability across different practice areas and jurisdictions stand to gain
INTA’s CEO says London-based firms have registered fewer delegates compared to past meetings in San Diego and Atlanta, and questions the 'ethics' of trying to participate without registering
Lobbies and interest groups are among the interveners in a major dispute over whether courts can set patent pool rates
Gift this article