It’ll be UK in the end


The referendum on the UK’s EU membership is fast approaching. How could an exit affect the unitary patent system?

The UK’s position within the upcoming unitary patent system is unclear as the referendum on jurisdiction’s EU membership looms ever closer. With Brits going to the polls on 23 June, the opposing sides are pushing their arguments as to why the UK should stay in or leave the EU. But an EU-wide patent is far from top of the agenda.

“The unitary patent system and the UK being in [the EU] are heavily linked,” argues Edward Nodder, partner at Bristows. “UK participation in the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is pretty fundamental—there is an expectation that English judges will be important and the English language will be dominant, and common law parts of the rules are critical.”

Adam Cooke, partner at DLA Piper, says: “If the UK were no longer to participate in the unitary patent system/UPC, the viability of the whole project could well be at stake as about half of European patents are only validated in the UK, France and Germany.”

The economical argument for the UK’s continued membership of the EU has been front and centre for the Remain camp, with the Treasury predicting that the country would lose at least £2,600 in GDP per household after 15 years.

The monetary value of the unitary patent system should not be underestimated either, according to Paul Chapman, partner at Marks & Clerk.

He says: “If the UK votes to leave the EU, it will increase costs for companies wanting to obtain patent protection in the UK.”

The unitary patent system is primarily aimed at reducing the cost of securing patent protection in Europe, so that EU member states can compete with the US.

Without EU-wide protection and a court in which to protect it, that aim is being forgotten.

Nodder says: “At the highest level, it was thought that obtaining patents and enforcing them in Europe was currently too expensive, slow and complicated, compared to the US (and how things were likely to become in China and other rising economies). Not having the unitary patent and UPC will perpetuate those disadvantages.”

There is also a chance that a UK exit could put the whole project at risk. The agreement behind the UPC will not be ratified until 13 signatories give their approval and, as it currently stands, the UK, France and Germany must be among them.

Nodder says: “It’s more likely people would say that the UPC just does not make legal or economic sense without the UK, and maybe countries won’t bother ratifying, and the unitary patent system and UPC will just die.”

Not all negative

There are some who would prefer the UK to stand outside of the unitary patent system, given the size of the market.

Nodder says “For companies that expect to be attacked under patents like generic drug companies, I think they would prefer a system where the UK was separate and the attacking party had to bring two lots of proceedings—one via the UPC and one in the UK Patents Court.”

This also probably true of licensing companies whose patents are their only business. Costly and repetitive litigation makes invalidating patents more than most can stomach. A standard European patent must be litigated in every jurisdiction it has been validated in, so a finding of invalidity in one country does not affect the patent in another. The UPC and unitary patent, on the other hand, offer the opportunity to knock out a patent in one fell swoop.

“It’s probably going to be more patent-friendly compared to the UK courts (some give the UK the nickname of the patent killing field). So for those who are worried about having valuable patents cancelled, being outside the UPC would not be a problem,” says Nodder.

But the UK would be much better off if it could participate in the unitary patent system, argues Cooke.

He summaries: “If the UK votes against Brexit and remains in the EU, the unitary patent system/UPC could well become a reality by early May next year. As the UK is one of the largest markets in the EU, its participation in the unitary patent/UPC is not only crucial for the project but also represents an invaluable opportunity for businesses, whether located in the UK or elsewhere.”

“Brexit would also be bad for UK lawyers as they would not be able to represent clients before the UPC. And the UPC would also be deprived of the participation of UK judges.”
Features
The latest features from IPPro Patents
Barney Dixon speaks to James Muraff of Neal Gerber Eisenberg on how to tackle patent subject matter eligibility in the ever-growing wake of Alice
Doris Spielthenner of Practice Insight discusses Amazon’s now expired ‘1-Click’ purchase patent and the problems with owning such a broad “super-patent”
Join Our Newsletter

Sign up today and never
miss the latest news or an issue again

Subscribe now
While uncertainty persists, plant breeders may need to double down to secure their rights, says Penny Maplestone of the British Society of Plant Breeders
Least developed countries can now more easily obtain compulsory licences during public health emergencies, but some have been slow to take advantage. Vítor Palmela Fidalgo of Inventa International explains why
Diana Portna of D&L IP Group explains how Ukraine’s compulsory licensing laws could be opened up for the public interest, and how rights owners could react
Facing unacceptable pendencies in 2003, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office dug deep to make the patent prosecution service more efficient
TC Heartland’s Supreme Court question may see patent owners going cold on the Eastern District of Texas
It is incumbent on practitioners and applicants to take care in drafting and prosecuting applications, says Bea Koempel-Thomas of Lee & Hayes
Country profiles
The latest country profiles from IPPro Patents
Bruno Nunes of BN IP explains how patent prosecution and licensing works in Macau, a market dominated by gaming and pharma
Tran Viet Phuong of Duong Tran offers a handy guide to patent prosecution
IPPro Connects

Visit our sister site
the worlds biggest and best IP directory

ipproconnects.com
The Andean Community has stood firm in the defence of its owns interests, says Jesús Cuba and Kelly Sánchez of OMC Abogados & Consultores
The first preliminary injunction granted by a China IP court was awarded to Christian Louboutin. Dr Weili Ma of Chofn Intellectual Property explains
Patent prosecution in South Africa rarely favours the inventor, but recent reforms are aiming to change that, one little bit at a time
The Tanzania Patent Office is a useful partner in the prosecution process, says Sunday Godfrey Ndamugoba of ABC Attorneys
Dominic Ogega Mwale, managing partner at Mwale & Company, explains how to patent in Kenya
Patent owners looking for an attractive place to seek protection in Asia need look no further than Singapore, says Max Ng and Gerald Mursjid of Gateway Law Corporation
Interviews
The latest interviews from IPPro Patents