tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post7513709250390942665..comments2024-03-18T17:10:35.838+00:00Comments on The IPKat: We can sign-up, but can we opt-out?: 24 Member States sign Unified Patent Court AgreementVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-47193821495894982122013-02-21T11:40:02.875+00:002013-02-21T11:40:02.875+00:00Language discrimination cannot exist in the EU.
T...Language discrimination cannot exist in the EU.<br /><br />This is written in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.<br /><br />So the translation regime is wrong and discrimates businesses that have to understand automated translations, instead of proper translations in EN, FR, DE.<br /><br />Is there any procedure to appeal this monster at the CJEU?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-16511448486458968772013-02-20T20:47:08.192+00:002013-02-20T20:47:08.192+00:00Hi Amerikat (and assorted UPC geeks),
We batted a...Hi Amerikat (and assorted UPC geeks),<br /><br />We batted around some thoughts on this a while back, and have been resurrecting them after reading your post. Our thoughts were a bit long for the comments box, so we've written a blog post by way of response:<br /><br />http://wp.me/2LC0XEmily Wealhttp://ipcopy.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-45556670764276177482013-02-20T14:39:36.310+00:002013-02-20T14:39:36.310+00:00Anon 10:48 - no, there is a separate ratification ...Anon 10:48 - no, there is a separate ratification procedure required. A little while before Christmas I was asked by a client what this would involve. I spoke to an official at the UKIPO involved in the UK implementation of the unitary patent system, who claimed that this would be by "the normal method" of ratification for treaties. <br /><br />The official wouldn't be drawn on what this involves, but, intriguingly, hinted that "various options" were being considered (which rather contradicts the idea of a "normal method" being employed, if such a thing exists). If I remember correctly, the IPO were liaising with the FCO's Treaty Section lawyers on this and the end result maybe that ratification will not require Select Committee scrutiny or a Parliamentary vote.<br /><br />Though the official was frustratingly vague as to what ratification *will* involve, it seems to me that if Parliamentary scrutiny (whether by a Select Committee or by the Commons and Lords) is ruled out, the opportunity may no longer exist for us in the profession and industry to make further representations.<br /><br />As a further puzzle, I managed to establish that, if the Agreement *does* go before a Select Committee, this may not necessarily be the European Scrutiny Committee. Again, the official was rather evasive on this point and couldn't, or wouldn't, tell me who it might be. My own guess is that the European Scrutiny Committee has shown itself to perhaps be a little too rigorous in its taking of evidence and grilling of successive IP ministers, not to mention its well-known Eurosceptic leanings, so the search is on for a friendlier Committee to rubber-stamp the ratification...<br /><br />Do we have any experts in UK constitutional or treaty law who might be able to shed more light on this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-14503814153623666522013-02-20T13:38:16.085+00:002013-02-20T13:38:16.085+00:00May I express an alternative interpretation of the...May I express an alternative interpretation of the opt-out mechanism:<br /><br />After the end of the transitional period, every European patent/application will be litigated exclusively at the UPC (provided that no national proceedings are pending). If the patentee/applicant opts out "from the exclusive competence of the Court", and after the expiry of the period of Art. 83(1), an action may be brought either before the UPC or before a national court. If the patentee/applicant does not opt-out, an action will habe to be brought before the UPC. In other words, the opt-out mechanism extends the seven year transitional period of Art. 83(1) in respect of a patent that has been entered into the Registry. For this reason the request for the use of the opt-out will have to be filed "by the latest one month before expiry of the transitional period". <br /><br />If the patentee/applicant withdraws the use of the opt-out (Art. 83(4)) at some point after the expiry of the transitional period, and provided that no national proceedings are pending, the UPC acquires exclusive competence. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-66830083260927986052013-02-20T12:55:17.998+00:002013-02-20T12:55:17.998+00:00A further comment, since under Article 88 (1) the ...A further comment, since under Article 88 (1) the agreement, like the EPC, is equally valid in each of the three languages German, English and French, I would have thought that there are good grounds for considering that all patent attornies with a litigation certificate are entitled to represent.<br /><br />EdT Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-2491201877309171072013-02-20T12:34:16.465+00:002013-02-20T12:34:16.465+00:00Thanks anon 10:14 - perhaps I was reading Article ...Thanks anon 10:14 - perhaps I was reading Article 48(1) too optimitically, noting that the German text refers to "Anwälte" rather than "Rechtsanwälte".<br /><br />EdTAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-80199831198790393222013-02-20T10:48:21.027+00:002013-02-20T10:48:21.027+00:00Can I ask what I suspect is a very stupid question...Can I ask what I suspect is a very stupid question: is signing that took place yesterday the 'ratification' we were expecting to take most of the year? Or is there a second step required? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-45923250990246170422013-02-20T10:14:53.471+00:002013-02-20T10:14:53.471+00:00No, because the relevant regulation (http://www.ip...No, because the relevant regulation (http://www.ipreg.org.uk/document_file/file/IPReg_Regulations_Website.pdf) only gives:<br />i) A right to conduct appeals from and/or apply for judicial review in the High Court<br />of decisions of:<br />a) the Comptroller General of Patents,<br />b) an Appointed Person, or<br />c) any other body or tribunal in England and Wales making decisions relating to<br />the subsistence, scope, grant, enforcement, exploitation or ownership of<br />intellectual property rights such as may be constituted from time to time;<br />ii) A right to conduct litigation in:<br />a) the Patents County Court; and<br />b) any County Court when the court is hearing a matter where Part 63 of the Civil<br />Procedure Rules apply or any matters ancillary thereto;<br />iii) A right of audience to appear before:<br />a) the Patents County Court;<br />b) the High Court in appeals proceedings mentioned in paragraph (i) but not<br />applications for judicial review; and<br />c) the appeal tribunal constituted by the Registered Designs Act 1949 (as<br />amended from time to time);<br />iv) A right to conduct appeals from decisions in proceedings mentioned in paragraphs<br />(i)-(iii) above to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.<br /><br />It's up to the UPC to decide who it recognises for representation and advocacy before it. I suspect only those who have rights before all national first instance patent tribunals in national states will get UPC rights. I certainly doubt that EPAs / (C/R)PAs will get automatic rights to litigate and advocate before it. There may even be a UPC Bar exam, one day...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-30265914952759130342013-02-20T09:46:52.788+00:002013-02-20T09:46:52.788+00:00I take it that under the IPReg provisions, all UK ...I take it that under the IPReg provisions, all UK patent attornies now have a litigation certificate and will be entitled to represent before the unitary patent court. Anyone know any different?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-61077768722625609832013-02-19T19:23:21.141+00:002013-02-19T19:23:21.141+00:00May I add that "opt out from the exclusive co...May I add that "opt out from the exclusive competence of the Court" has another very important implication (highlighted by Hanns Ullrich):<br /><br />It means that if you, as patent(s) holder, opt out for your patent(s), litigation on your patent(s) will not be before Unified Patent Court, but before national courts (I agree with the AmeriKat on this point), but that's all you've opted out. The UPC agreement still apply for your patent(s), and in particular, rules defining direct/indirect infringement and limitations thereof (you know, the (in)famous Cyprus compromise).Gibushttps://www.unitary-patent.eunoreply@blogger.com