Browse Options
UPC: Why has the Preparatory Committee thrown expressions of interest sent by Spanish candidate judges into the bin?

As readers will no doubt be aware, earlier this year the Preparatory Committee of the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) drew up a short-list of candidate Judges after selecting them from an overwhelming raft of more than 1300 applications. This author knows of at least one Spanish candidate Judge whose expression of interest was discarded on the grounds that Spain is not a “signatory” state. Is this really a sound legal reason to throw the applications sent by Spanish candidate Judges into the bin? In my respectful view, it is not.

The reason is that according to the “Call for Expression of Interest” published by the Preparatory Committee in September 2013, one of the prerequisites was to be a na [...]

‘There are no disadvantages to the Unitary Patent’

There are no disadvantages to the Unitary Patent package, as it is an optional system. Willem Hoyng, lawyer of Hoyng Monegier and member of the Legal and the Expert Panel of the UPC Preparatory Committee, wrote this in a paper made available to Kluwer IP News.

willem hoyngIf companies don’t want to put all their eggs in one single Unitary Patent basket, fearing they may lose a patent for the whole UP territory in revocation proceedings, other options are possible. They can choose to file nationally or – during a transition period of seven or possibly even fourteen years – to opt out of the UPC court system, Hoyng argues. He thinks too much emphasis is put on the risk of losing a patent under the UPC: [...]

German Courts Differ on the IP Infringing Character of the Presentation of a Product at an International Trade Fair

Dr. Simon Klopschinski

In recent time the trademark, copyright and competition law senate (1st senate) of the Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) and one of the patent senates of the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court have issued conflicting decisions on the question of whether the presentation of a product at a trade fair in Germany constitutes an IP infringing offer.

Under German law the exclusive right of the patentee includes the act of offering a product which uses the patented invention. The meaning of offering is very broad since it does not only cover offers within the meaning of contract law but all acts which from an objective point of view make a patent infringing item available for pur [...]

Progress update on Ratification process Unified Patent Court and renewal fees Unitary Patent

Member States of the UPC Agreement reported on the national ratification processes during the 7th meeting of the UPC Preparatory Committee on 4 November 2014 in Brussels.

According to the Preparatory Committee the situation looks promising since many Member States reported they hope to be able to ratify the UPCA in the course of 2015.

Other issues discussed were the first tranche of training for candidate judges and the progress in the IT working group. A tender is expected to be published before the end of this year. The Committee also had an initial discussion on the draft rules for mediation and arbitration and is near conclusion on the draft rules for legal aid.

logo epoThe EPO reported progress [...]

Internships for candidate judges Unified Patent Court in UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands

UPCAs part of their training, the first group of some 25 candidate Unified Patent Court (UPC) judges will follow internships at specialized patent courts, such as those in the UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands. Paul van Beukering, Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the UPC, told Kluwer IP Law that various options are currently under investigation at courts in these four countries.

The potential judges will begin their training in the first quarter of 2015. According to the Preparatory Committee Roadmap, the candidate judges were supposed to have started their training at the end of 2014, but this was subsequently postponed.

Apart from courses on patent law and patent litigation (o [...]

UKIPO gains new powers to revoke patents which fail a novelty or obviousness test – but only if ‘clearly invalid’

by Dr Mark A G Jones

The UK’s Intellectual Property Act 2014, enacted to implement recommendations of the 2011 Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property, has extended the powers available to the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) to revoke British patents of its own motion. This applies both to patents granted directly by the UKIPO or patents obtained through the EPO route. The new statutory provisions are contained in Section 73 of the Patents Act 1977, as amended.

The new power, available from 1 October, 2014, allows the UKIPO to revoke a patent for lack of novelty or lack of inventive step where a third party has sought an Opinion from the UKIPO Opinions Service as to [...]

Contributors, Authors, Books, & More...