Unitary Patent as an object of property

No items found.
​
November 9, 2022

A registered intellectual property right such as a patent is normally considered a property right of the country in which it has effect. Rules relating to the patent as an object of property, for example what is required to legally assign the right, are governed by each country independently. This system breaks down however when a right covers multiple countries, such as in the case of the Unitary Patent.

To address this difficulty, the Unitary Patent Regulation specifies that the law of property governing a Unitary Patent shall be that of the residence or principal place of business of the applicant as recorded on the European Patent Register as at the date of filing, if that is in one of the member states of the EU participating in the Unitary Patent system. (In the case of joint applicants, it is the first named applicant that has its residence or principal place of business in a participating EU country). If no applicant has its residence or principal place of business in a participating EU country, then the default law is German law, unless at the time of filing the request for unitary effect an address within a participating EU country is given as a place of business of one of the applicants as at the date of filing of the European patent application. If such a place of business is stated, then the law of that country applies.

Thus, for non-EU applicants, German law will apply unless an assertion is made when requesting the Unitary Patent that the applicant (or in the case of joint applicants, any one applicant) had place of business within a participating EU country, in which case the law of that country will apply.

The assertion to have had a place of business within a participating EU country can only be made when requesting unitary effect, i.e. just after grant of the European patent, but the relevant date to have had such a place of business is the filing date of the application. An EU address cannot be asserted at any other time, and once the assertion is made it cannot be modified or withdrawn. The governing law will not change if, for example, the patent or application is subsequently assigned to an entity domiciled in a different EU country.

There is no obligation to state such a place of business just because it arguably existed – it is perfectly permissible to state no place of business within a participating EU country and then German law will apply. There is no examination of the veracity of the assertion.

These rules may appear complex but similar provisions have operated in respect of EU Trademarks and Community Registered Designs for many years (except that for those the default law is Spain, because the seat of the EU IPO is Alicante). There is no reason for alarm.

In fact, we consider that German law is a reasonable default for the governing law for a Unitary Patent as an object of property as Germany has well understood laws relating to assignments, licences etc. Therefore, non-EU proprietors should not be concerned about German law applying.

The law specified under these provisions has no relevance to the law of infringement, which will be governed by the provisions of the Unitary Patent Regulation and Unified Patent Court Agreement.

The Latest Thought Leadership pieces in the Content Hub

Geographic Scope of the UPC and Unitary Patent
February 22, 2023
The grant of a European Patent allows patent rights to be obtained in respect of over 35 states by means of the respective validation procedures for those states.
Opt-out decision
December 2, 2022
Owners of European patent rights (both pending and granted patents) need to decide, in respect of each right individually, whether to opt out of the Unified Patent Court ("UPC") system.
Stay in the Know

The Patent Strategist

Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Heading
This is some text inside of a div block.
This is some text inside of a div block.

Latest Insights

Showing 0 of 100
Making the switch from in-house to private practice
28 June 2019
During his career in IP partner Matt Jones has held positions in both private practice law firms, and in-house corporate legal departments, before he joined EIP.
#
Litigation
​
Blockchain and the impact of patents
28 May 2019
In an article for Intellectual Property Magazine partner Christof Höhne and legal assistant Tatiana Dolenko look at the rise of blockchain technology and how blockchain patents, and their litigation,...
#
Litigation
​
Protecting IP rights pre- and post-Brexit
07 May 2019
With the date the UK was due to leave the European Union having passed, Partner Darren Smyth provides an update in The Law Society Gazette with regards to the continued protection of IP rights in the...
#
Patenting
​
IP Mistakes to Avoid - No. 4 - DIY
11 October 2016
In the final part of the series of Top IP Mistakes to Avoid, partner Laurence Brown from the EIP office in Leeds warns against the pitfalls of attempting to obtain IP protection yourself.
#
Patenting
​
IP Mistakes to Avoid – No. 3 – Thinking you’re covered because you’ve got the company name registered
04 October 2016
Ahead of his presentation on the Top IP Mistakes to Avoid at Leeds Business Week, partner Laurence Brown from EIP’s Leeds office dispels one of the most common myths surrounding IP protection.
#
Patenting
​
IP Mistakes to Avoid – No. 2 – Revealing your idea before getting your IP in place
30 September 2016
In the second in our series of Top IP Mistakes to Avoid, partner Laurence Brown from EIP’s office in Leeds discusses how businesses often forego their chances of obtaining patent protection by making...
#
Patenting
​
IP Mistakes to Avoid - No.1 - Burying your head in the sand
20 September 2016
In the lead up to EIP’s participation in Leeds Business Week, partner Laurence Brown of EIP’s Leeds office will be revealing his Top IP Mistakes to Avoid.
#
Patenting
​
Patent Box and R&D tax credits: Are you missing out?
15 April 2016
EIP has teamed up with Jumpstart for an evening seminar on how innovative companies can get maximum benefit from the Patent Box and R&D tax credit schemes.
#
Patenting
​
Pitfalls of translating prior art documents
28 January 2015
The Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (JIPLP) has published an article by Darren Smyth, Robert Barker and Tim Belcher advising applicants how to handle requests for translations of...
#
Patenting
​
Getting to the EIP London Office
Use this guide to locate the EIP office in London