NIPC News

Jane Lambert While hardly unexpected. the confirmation given yesterday to Joff Wild  and others that "the UK will not be seeking involvement in the UP/UPC system." is nonetheless regrettable.   No country stood to gain more from the Unified Parent Court and the unitary patent than the UK because it would have reduced considerably the costs of patent prosecution in Europe and patent enforcement in the UK.  That is why both the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property  and the Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property and Growth  urged HM government to push for a single European patent for the UK and other EU member states with a unified court for the resolution of disputes over such patents. The excuse given to Mr Wild and other journalists for this country's volte-face is that: "Participating in a court that applies EU law and bound by the CJEU is inconsistent with our aims of becoming an independent self-governing nation.” That was ju...

Curate's Egg Author  George du Maurier Jane Lambert The dialogue between the curate and his bishop runs as follows: Bishop: "I'm afraid you've got a bad egg, Mr Jones"; Curate: "Oh, no, my Lord, I assure you that parts of it are excellent!"  The white paper on  The future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union   has not satisfied many people on either side of the Brexit debate, but it is not all bad.   In fact, just like the curate's egg two parts of it could well be described as excellent. One is a commitment at para 148 to: "explore a new bilateral agreement with the EU, which would cover a coherent package of rules on jurisdiction, choice of jurisdiction, applicable law, and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil, commercial, insolvency and family matters. This would seek to build on the principles established in the Lugano Convention and subsequent developments at EU level i...

Jane Lambert I mentioned the IPAN World IP Day conference in Happy World Intellectual Property Day   earlier today.  I knew that the Minister would speak at the event but I did not know that he would announce British Ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement .  But that is precisely what happened (see  Sam Gyimah announces ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement   26 April 2018 IPO). That does not mean that the Unified Patent Court will open its doors any time soon or that the UK can remain party to the agreement after Brexit.  The German Constitutional Court has still to hear and determine a constitutional complaint by the German IP lawyer, Dr Ingve Björn Stjerna, on the constitutionality of the UPC Agreement and that may take more than the 11 months in which the UK remains a member of the EU (see  One Year to Brexit - Are Rumours of the Death of the Unified Patent Court Agreement Greatly Exaggerated?   29 March ...

Jane Lambert Weather permitting, I shall give a talk to Queen Mary University of London Centre for Commercial Law Studies at 67-69 Lincoln's Inn Fields entitled What if anything can be salvaged from the UPC Agreement?  in their Implications of Brexit on Intellectual Property Law which is due to take place between 18:00 and 20:00 tonight. I say "weather permitting" because I woke this morning to a thick covering of snow which I am about to attempt to clear from my drive and my neighbours are already working to clear from our lane.  I mentioned this seminar in Implications of Brexit on IP Law   19 Jan 2018 and my views on the topic in  What if anything can be salvaged from the UPC Agreement?     26 Jan 2018 NIPC Law. My choice of topic is particularly apposite today because Alan Johnson, a partner of Bristows, reported on Friday that almost all the steps had been taken to enable the British government to deposit an instrument of ratification (see...

Jane Lambert Art 89 (1) of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court  provides that the Agreement will come into force on the 1st day of the 4th month after the deposit with the Commission of the 13th instrument of ratification or accession including deposits of such instruments by France, Germany and the United Kingdom. According to the Council website , 12 states have deposited instruments of ratification. The last of these was Italy which deposited its instrument on on 12 Feb 2017.  Italy's ratification is particularly significant for two reasons. The first is that it had opposed the unitary patent in C-274/11 - Spain and Italy v Commission and others     [2013] EUECJ C-274/11 on the grounds that the implementing legislation was incompatible with EU law. The second reason why Italy's participation is significant is that it will be entitled to host one of the sections of the Central Division of the Court of First Instance should the UK be obliged ...