Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna, LL.M.

EU Patent Reform: Compatible with the German Constitution?,

Article on the possible ratification of the international Agreement on a Unified Patent Court in Germany (Published on 11/10/2014)


Contents:

While the delivery of the Statement of Position of the Advocate General in the CJEU nullity proceedings against the two Regulations on the “unitary patent” is delayed, the German Federal Government seems to prepare for the ratification of the international Agreement on the Unified Patent Court. That the fee situation is still unclear and that there is no final version of the Rules of Procedure yet do not appear to be regarded as obstacles, nor do the constitutional complaints in a number of European countries and the complaints to the European Court of Human Rights raised against the procedures at the European Patent Office (EPO). Since the Court Agreement relies on the activities of the latter and on the legal sources underlying these activities, such violations of fundamental rights would be continued by it. In case of an international Agreement, German law provides for the possibility to request an assessment of a ratification’s compatibility with fundamental rights by the Federal Constitutional Court, prior to the ratification statute entering into force. This means of legal redress, which can also be available to legal persons with a seat outside Germany, and some aspects of the “unitary patent package” with relevance under constitutional law will be explained below.

  • Download English version (article of 06/10/2014, redacted version of 11/10/2014, PDF)
  • Download German version (article of 06/10/2014, redacted version of 11/10/2014, PDF)


Sources used:

  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The oral hearing on Spain’s actions at the CJEU” (PDF).
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – New problems ahead?” (PDF).
  • Link to the protocol of Prime Minister Cameron’s statement in the House of Commons on 02/07/2012 on the European Council summit of 28-29/06/2012 and its results in relation to the “unitary patent” and court system (Hansard).
  • Link to the Press Statement “European patent judiciary is well underway” of the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer oProtection of 19/03/2014 (PDF, German).
  • Link to the video recording of the Legal Affairs Committee meeting on 11/10/2011.
  • Link to Stjerna, The Parliamentary History of the European “Unitary Patent” (Tredition 2016), the foreword can be viewed here.
  • Link to “Statement of Positon” of Advocate General Juliane Kokott in matter 1/09 of 02/07/2010 (PDF) | Original (PDF, French).
  • Link to interlocutory decision R 19/12 of the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal of 25/04/2014 (PDF, German).


Further material:

  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The »forgotten« documents of the Preparatory Committee of the Unified Patent Court”.
  • Link to Stjerna, Official information obtained under the German Federal Freedom of Information Act.
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The Parliamentary UPCA ratification proceedings in Germany” (PDF).
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – First constitutional complaint against UPCA ratification in Germany”.
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – Questions and answers on the German Constitutional Complaint proceedings” (PDF).
  • Link to Stjerna, “Die Verfassungsbeschwerde vom 31.03.2017 gegen die Ratifikation des Übereinkommens über ein Einheitliches Patentgericht – Verfahren 2 BvR 739/17 vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht” (“The constitutional complaint of 31/03/2017 against the ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court – Proceedings 2 BvR 739/17 before the Federal Constitutional Court”), the foreword can be viewed here.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “Patent Law: German Constitutional Court judge Prof. Huber on the situation at the European Patent Office”.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “Patent Law: Constitutional complaints relating to the European Patent Office, access to complaint briefs for the public”.
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The German state powers in constitutional complaint proceedings 2 BvR 739/17 (Part 1 of 2)” (PDF).
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The German state powers in constitutional complaint proceedings 2 BvR 739/17 (Part 2 of 2)” (PDF).
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The reimbursement of costs in constitutional complaint proceedings 2 BvR 739/17 (UPCA I) – an almost never-ending story”.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – Second constitutional complaint against UPCA ratification in Germany”.
  • Link to Stjerna, “Die Verfassungsbeschwerde vom 18.12.2020 gegen die Ratifikation des Übereinkommens über ein Einheitliches Patentgericht – Verfahren 2 BvR 2217/20 vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht” (“The constitutional complaint of 18/12/2020 against the ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court – Proceedings 2 BvR 2217/20 before the Federal Constitutional Court”), the foreword can be viewed here.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – A comment on the BVerfG’s decision of 23/06/2021 in matter 2 BvR 2217/20”.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “Patent Law: End of the term of office of Constitutional Court judge Prof. Huber – When a constitutional complaint outlasts the twelve-year term of office of the judge responsible for it”.
  • Link to the post Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – Federal Republic of Germany deposits the instrument of ratification for the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court”.
  • Link to the article Stjerna, “The European Patent Reform – The structural lack of judicial independence and impartiality at the Unified Patent Court” (PDF).


If you wish to support my work, you can do so here. Many thanks!

Archive