• Home
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise
    • Advertise On IP Watch
    • Editorial Calendar
  • Videos
  • Links
  • Help

Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

  • Copyright
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Opinions
  • People News
  • Venues
    • Bilateral/Regional Negotiations
    • ITU/ICANN
    • United Nations – other
    • WHO
    • WIPO
    • WTO/TRIPS
    • Africa
    • Asia/Pacific
    • Europe
    • Latin America/Caribbean
    • North America
  • Themes
    • Access to Knowledge/ Open Innovation & Science
    • Food Security/ Agriculture/ Genetic Resources
    • Finance
    • Health & IP
    • Human Rights
    • Internet Governance/ Digital Economy/ Cyberspace
    • Lobbying
    • Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer
  • Health Policy Watch

German Court To Hear Unified Patent Court Challenge, As EPO Staff Questions Persist

26/02/2018 by Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

The German Federal Constitutional Court has agreed to take up a challenge that could potentially derail the Unified Patent Court (UPC). The special – and opaque – procedure under the national constitution allows a single individual to claim constitutional breaches, said Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf) patent litigator Clemens Plassmann. The lawsuit leaves the UPC in disarray at least until next year, he said.

Meanwhile, in the never-ending feud between European Patent Office (EPO) management and staff, President Benoȋt Battistelli was forced to back off from a planned rule change that would allow him to fire staff members “if the exigencies of the service require abolition of their post or a reduction in staff.”

European Patent Organization

The complaint to the German court was signed by a lawyer but it is unclear who is paying for or steering it, Plassmann said in an interview. The challenge is apparently an attempt to cast doubt on the country’s procedure for ratifying the UPC agreement, he said. Ordinarily such  an action requires a majority, but the challenger claims that a two-thirds vote is required for formal passage, he said.

Even if the vote was flawed, another question is whether an individual can bring such a case to the constitutional court, said Plassmann. Generally, cases brought before the court must be based on allegations of breaches of one’s fundamental rights under the constitution, he said. In this case there is no such apparent breach but that doesn’t mean the case should not be taken seriously, he said.

The challenge links to two other cases pending before the court, Plassmann said. One relates to the internal structure of the European Patent Office and the independence of its Technical Board of Appeals, the other to ratification of the Canada-EU Trade Agreement, he said. There are overlapping issues among the three cases arising from the interface of German constitutional law with international law, he said. Plassmann predicted the court will not decide them independently of one another.

The claimant in the UPC constitutional case is seeking referral to the European Court of Justice, Plassmann said. But since that court has already rendered judgment in a Spanish action contesting the UPC agreement, and the new system has been tweaked to take that ruling into account, there does not seem to be merit in a putting the new challenge to the EU high court, he said.

EPO Staff Issues Remain

Separately, at the EPO, the proposal to allow employees to be fired “without the usual compensation and without a social security system to fall back on” infuriated the EPO FLIER team, which says it aims “to provide staff with uncensored, independent information at times of social conflict.”  The provision (Article 53) would have been the “final straw for patent quality 2.0,” it said, because it, along with a plan for five-year employment contracts, would scare off even more of the best job candidates, it said in a 16 February statement.

The EPO-FLIER team identifies itself as a “group of concerned staff who wish to remain anonymous due to the prevailing harsh social climate and absence of the rule of law” at the EPO.

During a December Administrative Council debate on modernising the employment framework, an EPO member state “supported by others” suggested including a new provision, identical to the one now in World Intellectual Property Organization staff regulations, that would allow employees to be separated when their jobs are removed or staffing levels decreased, an office spokesman told us on 26 February. This provision took the form of new article 53(1) in the draft proposal that has been under discussion between the EPO and the AC over the past few weeks, he said.

However, although this sort of provision exists in other legislation, “it generated some particular concerns at the Office,” leading Battistelli, who did not propose it, to persuade supporters to delete it from the text submitted for AC approval at its 21-22 March meeting, he said.

The main elements of the new employment framework, said the office, are now to increase the maximum ceiling of fixed-term appointments from 5 percent to 20 percent of the total budget posts (a figure normally 30-40 percent in most international organisations); limit the maximum duration of fixed-term hires to 10 years, as is done in EU member states and institutions, and which could be converted into permanent positions at any time; and “improve the rights of the staff under fixed-term appointments.”

Despite the withdrawal of Art. 53, however, there are still “serious problems” with Battistelli’s proposed reforms, EPO FLIER said on 20 February. These include changing current recruitment processes and removing the maximum retirement age, it said.

 

Image Credits: muenchen.de

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Related

Dugie Standeford may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

Creative Commons License"German Court To Hear Unified Patent Court Challenge, As EPO Staff Questions Persist" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Filed Under: IP Policies, Language, Subscribers, Themes, Venues, English, Europe, Finance, IP Law, Patents/Designs/Trade Secrets, Regional Policy

Trackbacks

  1. EPO Refuses to Admit that Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Dead, But It’s Boosting Others Who Are Lying About It for a Living | Techrights says:
    27/02/2018 at 11:34 am

    […] IP Watch‘s Dugie Standeford, who is familiar with UPC and EPO scandals, writes about the constitutional complaint going forward. To […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
My Tweets

IPW News Briefs

Saudis Seek Alternative Energy Partners Through WIPO Green Program

Chinese IP Officials Complete Study Of UK, European IP Law

Perspectives on the US

In US, No Remedies For Growing IP Infringements

US IP Law – Big Developments On The Horizon In 2019

More perspectives on the US...

Supported Series: Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities

Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities Series – Translations Now Available

The Myth Of IP Incentives For All Nations – Q&A With Carlos Correa

Read the TRIPS flexibilities series...

Paid Content

Interview With Peter Vanderheyden, CEO Of Article One Partners

More paid content...

IP Delegates in Geneva

  • IP Delegates in Geneva
  • Guide to Geneva-based Public Health and IP Organisations

All Story Categories

Other Languages

  • Français
  • Español
  • 中文
  • اللغة العربية

Archives

  • Archives
  • Monthly Reporter

Staff Access

  • Writers

Sign up for free news alerts

This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2021 · Global Policy Reporting

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.