Commission aims to clear the way for Unified Patent Court
The European Commission has proposed amending a set of regulations to allow the Unified Patent Court (UPC) to enter into force once it is ratified.
According to a statement on Monday, the commission wants to update the rules on the jurisdiction of EU member state courts and the recognition of judgments from those courts, as laid down by the so-called Brussels I Regulation.
The regulation is currently in force across the EU but will govern the UPC – the associated court system of the unitary patent, which was signed in December 2012 – so it must be updated before the UPC comes into force.
The commission is proposing amending the regulation to clarify how its jurisdictional rules will work in the context of the UPC, as well as how they should be applied to relations between EU member states, UPC members and those not signed up to the UPC agreement.
“By making changes to the rules on recognition of judgments, we are paving the way for the new Unified Patent Court to begin its work,” said Viviane Reding, the EU’s justice Commissioner.
Services commissioner Michel Barnier added: “The political agreement of December 2012 marked a major breakthrough, but the unitary patent will become a reality once the Unified Patent Court is established. We need to achieve this as quickly as possible, and today's proposal is another important step in that direction.”
The UPC, the agreement for which has been signed by 25 EU member states, will adjudicate on disputes over unitary patents and European patents (EPs). It can only enter into force once 13 member states (including Germany, the UK and France) ratify the agreement.
The Commission’s statement urges member states to sign the UPC agreement, as well as agree on its proposed amendments to the Brussels I Regulation, which the European Parliament must also approve.
Chris Thornham, partner at Taylor Wessing LLP, said the latest development was “very important” for getting the UPC working.
“The Brussels regulation provides a framework for determining the correct jurisdiction to try a civil action. For example, in the case of patents, the Brussels regulation determines that validity of a national part of an EP must be determined in the court of that nation. It also contains rules regarding the correct jurisdiction for hearing infringement, according to the domicile of the defendant (i.e. in the home court) or where the infringing act is done. With the arrival of the UPC, there will be a jurisdiction where validity and infringement can be tried for all the participating states in Europe.
"The Brussels regulation needs amendment to accommodate this new forum of the UPC. Until the amendment is made, there will be no orderly regulation of allocation of patent cases between national courts and the UPC.”
Approving the amendments to the Brussels I Regulation may not be a straightforward process, however, said Richard Pinckney, associate at law firm Bristows.
“One of the key issues which will need to be addressed is the interaction between the Brussels I Regulation and the UPC Agreement during the transition regime provided by Article 83 of the UPC Agreement. In particular, the amendments to the Brussels I Regulation will need to address the balance of jurisdiction between national courts and the UPC.”
Spain and Poland’s unwillingness to sign the UPC agreement may provide further complications, he added.
“Judgments of the UPC must also be recognised and enforced in all contracting member states to the UPC agreement. How will the Brussels I Regulation deal with the recognition and enforcement of UPC judgments in any non-contracting states, such as Spain and Poland?”
He added: “We wait with anticipation as to how the legislators navigate these potential issues and, most importantly, how long that process will take.”
