|The AmeriKat gargling, yawning,|
or screaming about the lack of
televised debates - take your pick
“The compromise was broadly accepted in substance, but the debate showed that further work is still needed. The Polish Presidency is committed to take the work forward with a view to reaching agreement on the creation of a unified patent court before end 2011”The press conference and later press release followed a policy debate by EU ministers in charge of their Member States intellectual property files (for the UK - Baroness Wilcox). The press release states that the debate was
"...on the creation of a unified patent litigation court, as a part of a package aimed at establishing a patent system with unitary effect that ensures uniform protection for inventions across Europe, together with the corresponding translation arrangements."
|A EU t-shirt, for no other reason|
than the AmeriKat is bored
of pictures of EU flags
1. The seats of the Central Division of the Court of 1st Instance, the Court of Appeal and the Patent Arbitration Centre
Several proposals have been made by member states interested in hosting the seats.
2. The financial contribution of the member states hosting a local division, a regional division, the Central Division or the Court of Appeal
The host member state would provide for the necessary facilities, equipment and, for the initial period, the management of the administrative staff.
3. Other financial contributions of the member states
While the objective should be that the Unified Patent Court becomes self financing over time, financial contributions will be required in the setting up phase based of a balanced and transparent formula.
4. Language of proceedings
While the principal should be maintained that the language of proceedings of a local division can be changed only with the agreement of both parties, a party could address a request to the President of the Court in order to change the language of proceedings for reasons of convenience and fairness.
|Who to sue and where to sue - you decide...|
5. Actions to be brought to the central division
The possibility to enhance the role of the central division and give parties the choice to bring actions from infringements concerning a number of member states before the central division instead of bringing them before a local or regional division. Under the compromise the parties would have the choice to bring an infringement action before the central division if the defendant is domiciled outside the EU.
6. Number of ratifications required for the entry into force
There is general consensus that the Unified Patent Court should enter into force once a minimum number of member states have ratified the Agreement.
7. Transitional period
A transitional period will be fixed for "classical" European patents without unitary effect during which actions can still be brought before the national court.
8. Revision clause
A range of provisions would have to be reviewed by the administrative committee in order to improve the functioning, efficiency and cost effectiveness of the Unified Patent Court and the quality of its judgements.
|Like the revolution, the unitary patent|
debates will not be televised....
So what do readers think? Is there some more breathing room to try and resolve some of the other concerns, or is this really only a debate about who gets the Central Division? Should we be getting more information about what was being debated by the Council last night? Does this press release tell us enough?