data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e0032/e0032659d0dead5247df3896b9f7fdb4eb97b959" alt=""
Although Hiroshi Sheraton, of McDermott Will & Emery in London, called the agreement “a major breakthrough, after over 40 years of failed negotiations and discussions”, Mark Owen, of Harbottle, classified the document as “a huge piece of Euro-fudge. A solution which no-one can possibly think is perfect, or even nearly good enough.”
James Boon, of Bristows, stressed “it is possible that in practice the new regime will encourage businesses to move out of Europe.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/62509/62509007b812f6ada298ec7a74b7519cf5f4cf3f" alt=""
The new European patent system should make it “cheaper” to get patent protection with unitary effect in most EU Member States and “the single court will allow disputes to be resolved once and for all for the entire continent, except Spain and Italy,” said Sheraton. “It will avoid complex, expensive and potentially conflicting multi-national litigation across different EU states.”
However, Boon said about the cost saving argument it is “likely to hold true for companies wishing to apply for a patent in a large number of states, but the new unitary patent may be no cheaper than applying for a European Patent and designating two or three key territories.” Owen went even further and called the “current solution a recipe for confusion and expense, precisely the two things the whole exercise was supposed to avoid.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d1132/d11322a3d1044cf4e5ec4ca7ee6e5e53f1d9d6c0" alt=""
Michiel Willems © 2012 CP Publishing Ltd. Picture: Redicecreations.com / IPBrief.net / IPJur.com