15.07.2022
Recently the Irish government reaffirmed its commitment to participate in the European Unitary Patent system and Unified Patent Court (UPC) and to hold a referendum to enable Ireland to do so.
Thank you
The UPC is a new international court set up by the participating member states to deal with the infringement and validity of both Unitary Patents and European patents. Its rulings will apply to all member states that have ratified the UPC Agreement. The UPC will enable patent proprietors to defend or challenge a patent via a single litigation process, instead of having to take multiple actions in individual member states.
The Tánaiste of Ireland stated that ratification of the UPC Agreement will not be a standalone referendum, but will be combined with other referenda and therefore, will not be held this year. However, a constitutional referendum may be held in 2023, or run concurrently with the Local and European Elections in 2024.
Benefits of the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court include:
*Note that during a transitional period of 7-14 years patent owners can, if they choose, opt their traditionally validated European patents out of the competence of the new Unified Patent Court.
For more information on the Unitary Patent System, see: The Unitary Patent System – nearly ready to go live (keltie.com)
To read the official press release by the Irish government, see: gov.ie - Government reaffirms commitment to participate in the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (www.gov.ie)
06.08.2024
CRISPR patent battle updateLast year, we published an article looking at some of the IP issues raised by CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology. One of these issues concerned the battles over the ownership of certain fundamental patents.
04.11.2024
T 56/21 – A missed opportunity for providing legal certainty on adapting the description at the EPOIt is typically a requirement at the EPO to amend the description for conformity with the allowable claims before grant of a patent; however, there have been a number of diverging decisions on the matter. The latest decision finds that there is no legal basis for enforcing this requirement, which might suggest that it will no longer be necessary to adapt the description. However, there are other decisions which support the requirement to adapt the description. In view of this, and because the Board of Appeal in this case opted not to involve the highest authority at the EPO in order to clarify the situation, it is unclear as to whether or not the requirement to adapt the description will remain.
Thank you