• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy
  • Home
  • About
  • Posts
  • Blogs
    • B2022
    • The IP Blog
    • Public Law & Regulation
    • AI
    • The Unified Patents Court

LoupedIn

Everything looks set for the Unified Patents Court to go ahead this year but…. Are we really out of the woods yet?

January 21, 2022, Gowling WLG

Everything looks set for the Unified Patents Court to go ahead this year but…. Are we really out of the woods yet?

Two items of UPC news have caught the eye in the early weeks of January.

First, the incoming French Presidency of the European Commission has made it unequivocally clear that it supports the implementation of the Unified Patents Court Agreement (UPCA), giving rise to the opening of the court itself, and the creation, for the first time, of a Unitary Patent in Europe, covering all EU member states that have ratified the UPCA. The new Presidency has indicated that it wants the system in place by the end of its term. Most commentators think that the remaining steps required in the preparation period will take a little longer than six months, but if the French-led European Commission could get to a point where the German ratification was complete, then an unstoppable four month countdown clock will have started, and the French Presidency will probably see that as an achievement of its goals.

Secondly, Austria has deposited its ratification papers, according to the UPC website, and that triggers the start of the Phase for Provisional Application. Although there is no deadline by which this phase need to be completed, it is a big step forward and means that the remaining practical steps, for example appointing judges and establishing the IT system, can begin in earnest. The UPC website indicates that the period in question is likely to be at least eight months. It goes on to say:

“When the State Parties are confident that the Court is functional, Germany will deposit its instrument of ratification of the UPC Agreement, which will trigger the countdown until this Agreement’s entry into force and set the date for the start of the UPC’s operations.”

As indicated above, it is likely that the French Presidency would like to see that happen before the end of its six month term of office if at all possible, but this will depend on the progress made between now and then.

However, is that really the last legal obstacle overcome?

The German “not for profit” organisation “The Association for the Promotion of a Free Information Infrastructure” is just one of several bodies which have openly questioned the legality of the UPC. There seem to be several grounds for this, not least the continuing references to the United Kingdom in the Agreement, which has not been “cleaned up” since Brexit. Further, there are questions regarding the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which has yet to give a view of the legality of the UPCA.

There is always in a risk that, seeking to push things through for political expediency, some issue is over-looked or brushed past without the necessary attention to detail. Those opposed to the UPC, and litigants looking to avoid its judgments will be alive to these issues and legal challenges are almost inevitable.

What does this mean?

One possibility is that a well-funded person or organisation may mount a legal challenge to the legality of the new system before it even gets off the ground. If such a case found its way to the CJEU, as it very well might, that could cause delay at the very least, and even a permanent blockage. However, it seems unlikely that any such claim would get political support, particularly in Germany. The French Presidency having stated, so clearly, that it has an objective of bringing the new system into existence, it would be unlikely the new German government would do anything other than provide support.

However, a more sinister threat to the UPC system is the risk that early litigants, faced with a possible pan-European injunction and/or a substantial multi-national damages award, might appeal on the basis of the questionable legality of the system, and get the matter in front of the CJEU through that route.

The threat of getting involved in such an action might be an active deterrent to potential litigants in the UPC, but only time will tell.

The road to a functioning UPC and UP continues to be long winding one.

About the author(s)

Gowling WLG
See recent postsBlog biography

Gowling WLG is an international law firm operating across an array of different sectors and services. Our LoupedIn blog aims to give readers industry insight, technical knowledge and thoughtful observations on the legal landscape and beyond.

  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    Ensuring the emerging geography of AI doesn’t become a TRAIN-wreck
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    Celebrating Black History Month: Stories from our community
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    No revocation carve-out and related actions – 2nd UPC decision on the merits
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    The first UPC decision on the merits is here

Filed Under: Opinion, The Unified Patents Court Tagged With: UPC

Views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect those of Gowling WLG.

NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Information made available on this website in any form is for information purposes only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or fail to take any action based upon this information. Never disregard professional legal advice or delay in seeking legal advice because of something you have read on this website. Gowling WLG professionals will be pleased to discuss resolutions to specific legal concerns you may have.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Driving change: £2.6 billion boost for UK automotive sector in 2025 Spending Review
  • UPC’s first decision concerning a second medical use patent
  • Sole(ly) aesthetic? The Birkenstock Sandal goes to the Federal Court of Justice

Tags

Artificial Intelligence (AI) (62) Autonomous vehicles (11) b2022 (19) Birmingham 2022 (8) Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games (15) Brexit (23) Climate change (16) Collective defined contribution (6) COP26 (11) Copyright (11) COVID-19 (23) Cyber security (7) Data protection (8) Defined contribution (7) Dispute Resolution (14) Employment (14) employment law (11) Environment (18) Environmental Societal Governance (9) ESG (50) ESG and pensions (11) General Election 2024 and pensions (8) Intellectual Property (87) IP (10) Life sciences (7) litigation funding (8) net zero (6) Patents (41) Pensions (53) Pension Schemes Act 2021 (11) Pensions dashboards (7) Pensions in 2022 (10) Pensions law (43) Procurement (7) Public Law & Regulation (39) Real Estate (27) Retail (8) sustainability (21) Tech (58) The Week In Pensions (11) Trademarks (16) UK (15) unified patents court (9) UPC (40) Week in HR (8)

Categories

Archives

Gowling WLG is an international law firm comprising the members of Gowling WLG International Limited, an English Company Limited by Guarantee, and their respective affiliates. Each member and affiliate is an autonomous and independent entity. Gowling WLG International Limited promotes, facilitates and co-ordinates the activities of its members but does not itself provide services to clients. Our structure is explained in more detail on our Legal Information page.

Footer

  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy

© 2025 Gowling WLG