The Unified Patent Court: here's the AIPPI resolution

PatLit is grateful to Dr. József K. Tálas (Attorney-at-Law and Managing Partner, Sár and Partners Attorneys at Law, Budapest), for drawing its attention to the resolution passed last week at the AIPPI Congress Seoul.  This resolution reads as follows:

Resolution put forward by AIPPI Special Committee Q165 

Unified Patent Court 

1. AIPPI acknowledges that the process of creating a legal framework for a Unified Patent Court, and for the creation and exercise of European Patents having unitary effect, is well advanced. 

2. AIPPI believes that the proposed system will not provide an improved experience for patent users. This is particularly the case if individual patent cases are subject to a third or fourth level of appellate review, with the General Court or the European Court of Justice being asked to consider substantive questions of patent law. AIPPI accepts that the proposed system is within the legal framework of the European Union, and its existence and structure are subject to the review of the European Court of Justice.  It believes, however, that the draft Regulation should be amended so as to make it clear that under the new system the European Court of Justice will have no greater role concerning the grant or exercise of unitary patents than is presently the
case for EP patents.

3. To that end, AIPPI reiterates its support for the deletion of Articles 6-8 from the currently proposed draft Regulation on the Unitary Patent as agreed by the council of the EU on June 28/29, 2012. It is recalled that the content of those articles already appears within the Draft Agreement on the Unified Patent Court and it is proposed that these provisions should apply to unitary patents as well.

4.  AIPPI is of the opinion that it is essential for the acceptance and success of the Unified Patent Court that the original goals of the project which promised judges "with the highest standards of competence and proven experience in the field of patent litigation to ensure expeditious and high quality decisions and thus enhance legal certainty" should not be put at risk.  To that end, it should be ensured that appropriate programs for the selection, training and ongoing support of such judges are put in place as soon as the draft agreement is approved. 

5. AIPPI notes that the Committee for the Rules of Procedure of the proposed Court is presently working to provide a further draft set of procedural rules.  AIPPI resolves that a public consultation period of at least 3 months should be allowed following the publication of this draft before any further steps are taken to adopt any text.

This blogger welcomes the resolution which, he believes, reflects a sentiment which is held by very many practitioners to whom he has spoken, both within AIPPI and beyond it.