B9 10379. Opinion Professor Sir Robin Jacob: “I write to give my opinion on a key aspect of the proposal to create a Unified Patent Court and a Unitary Patent. As will be known the plan is for an international agreement, a Statute for the Court and an EU Regulation. It is aspects of the latter which give rise the matters on which I express my opinion. In particular it is those aspects of the proposed Regulation which make EU law govern substantive patent law. They are contained in Arts 6-8, reproducing Arts 25-27 of the, failed, Community Patent Convention of 1989.
(…) This is no time for anything other than plain speaking. I am fortunate enough to have had wide experience, as barrister, judge and now academic, with the patent system from all angles. I have many contacts amongst users and lawyers. I know of no one in favour of involvement of the CJEU in patent litigation. On the contrary all, users, lawyers and judges are unanimously against it. The most recent manifestation of this was at the Venice conference of the EPO and EPLAW. So far as the Judges present were concerned, at the meeting of the Intellectual Property Judges Association (of which I had the honour to be elected President) there was unanimous opposition to the inclusion of Arts. 6-8 in the Regulation.
Lees hier meer. (EPlaw Patent Blog, zie ook vandaag ‘Venice Judges Resolution on a Unified Patent Court for the EU and Unitary Patent’ (hier) en de ‘EPLAW Resolution on the Regulation on Unitary Patent Articles 6 - 8, 29 October 2011.' (hier)).
