German Bar Association says UPC complaint is unfounded
The German Bar Association (DAV) has issued an opinion (pdf) saying that a constitutional complaint against the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is entirely unfounded.
Filed last year, the complaint has put the brakes on Germany’s ratification of the UPC, as the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG) continues to consider the filing.
Düsseldorf-based attorney Ingve Stjerna is believed to have filed the complaint, questioning the democratic accountability of the regulatory powers overseeing the UPC’s operation and the independence of the judiciary, and arguing that the UPC is in breach of existing EU law.
The complaint also argued that that the German UPC ratification law amends or supplements the Constitution, which would require a majority of two thirds of the Bundestag (Parliament) to pass it. However, the law was allegedly passed by a smaller majority than this.
Constantin Kurtz, partner at law firm Klaka in Düsseldorf, told WIPR that DAV believes the complaint is inadmissible insofar as it’s based on an alleged violation of EU law.
“The bar association says that the complaint is also inadmissible as far as it is based on the violation of constitutional provisions governing the organisation of the law-making process,” he added, citing articles 23(1) and 79(2) of the Constitution.
As Kurtz noted, DAV—which has around 65,000 members—says the appellant cannot base the complaint on an alleged violation of these provisions as the appellant’s rights conferred to him by the Constitution have not been breached.
He said that not everyone has standing to file a complaint with regard to any violation of the Constitution, and that because only those whose own rights have been violated can bring a complaint, “the bar says that the issue whether or not the law establishing the UPC would fall within the scope of article 23 and 79 was not an issue which could violate the appellant in his rights and thus his complaint would be inadmissible in this regard”.
The complaint prompted BVerfG to ask Germany’s Office of the President not to sign the law on ratification while the case was being dealt with, a request which the presidential office has agreed to.
Germany must ratify the UPC in order for it to be implemented.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today’s top stories
WWE enters ring over 'Cactus Jack' trademark
SCOTUS grants certiorari in lost profits fight
Federal Circuit often affirms decisions: Finnegan data
Russian state enterprise wins vodka TM battle in Benelux
Akerman expands LA litigation team
Complete our Reader Survey and tell us what you think about WIPR for a chance win a corporate subscription worth £2450.
Already registered?
Login to your account
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk