The Unitary Patent takes another step forward

By Robert Balsters,

Finally, some good news for the Unitary Patent after the German Federal Constitutional Court rejected the two applications for a preliminary injunction against the German Act of Approval to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA). The decisions mark a key step towards the implementation of the Unitary Patent Convention (UPC), says Robert Balsters.

On 9 July 2021, the German Federal Constitutional Court announced the rejection of two applications for a preliminary injunction against the German Act of Approval to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA).

The latest round of constitutional complaints against Germany's ratification of the UPCA were filed in December 2020 after the German Bundestag and Bundesrat approved the draft law ratifying the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court.

Within touching distance?

Before it can enter into force, the UPCA needs to be ratified by 13 of the 25 participating EU member states, including Germany, France and Italy (Italy replaces the UK following Britain’s exit from the EU). France and Italy have already ratified the agreement, and now the Bundesrat has approved the bill and the latest complaints are overcome, the last step is for the agreement to be signed and formalised by the German President. In theory, this means that it could be possible for the final preparatory steps to set up the Unified Patent Court (UPC) to start later this year.

Although there have been many ups and downs, this time it may be good to start preparing for the launch of the Unitary Patent system.

For more about the Unitary Patent, please see our frequently asked questions.

Robert Balsters is a Patent Attorney at Novagraaf in Geneva.

Latest news

Hot topics

Battle of the eagles: Trademark infringement and ‘indirect’ confusion

If a likelihood of direct confusion between two trademarks cannot be established, the courts may still be prepared to find infringement on the basis of a likelihood of indirect confusion. A decision by the England and Wales Court of Appeal over the ‘American Eagle’ trademark provides some insight into the circumstances necessary for indirect confusion to apply.

By Laura Morrish,
Battle of the eagles: Trademark infringement and ‘indirect’ confusion

For more information, please contact us

Cookie policy

To provide the best possible experience for website visitors, Novagraaf uses cookies. By clicking "Accept" or continuing using the site, you agree to our privacy policy, including our cookie policy.