This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52012IP0476
European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2012 on jurisdictional system for patent disputes (2011/2176(INI))
European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2012 on jurisdictional system for patent disputes (2011/2176(INI))
European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2012 on jurisdictional system for patent disputes (2011/2176(INI))
IO C 434, 23.12.2015, p. 34–38
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
23.12.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 434/34 |
P7_TA(2012)0476
Jurisdictional system for patent disputes
European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2012 on jurisdictional system for patent disputes (2011/2176(INI))
(2015/C 434/04)
The European Parliament,
— |
having regard to the Council Decision 2011/167/EU of 10 March 2011 authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection (1), |
— |
having regard to the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection (COM(2011)0215), |
— |
having regard to the proposal for a Council Regulation implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection with regard to the applicable translation arrangements (COM(2011)0216), |
— |
having regard to Opinion 1/09 of the Court of Justice of 8 March 2011 (2), |
— |
having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure, |
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs(A7-0009/2012), |
A. |
whereas an efficient patent system in Europe is a necessary prerequisite for boosting growth through innovation and to help European business, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), to face the economic crisis and global competition; |
B. |
whereas pursuant to Council Decision 2011/167/EU authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, France, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom were authorised to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection, by applying the relevant provisions of the Treaties; |
C. |
whereas on 13 April 2011, on the basis of the Council’s authorising Decision, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection, and a proposal for a Council Regulation implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection with regard to the applicable translation arrangements; |
D. |
whereas on 8 March 2011 the Court of Justice gave its opinion on the European and Community Patents Court proposal raising the point of its incompatibility with Union law; |
E. |
whereas effective unitary patent protection can only be ensured through a functioning patent litigation system; |
F. |
whereas, following the opinion of the Court of Justice, the Member States participating in the enhanced cooperation engaged in the creation of a Unified Patent Litigation Court by means of an international agreement; |
G. |
whereas, in this context, there is a substantial difference between ordinary international agreements and the founding treaties of the European Union, the latter having established a new legal order, possessing its own institutions, for the benefit of which the States have limited their sovereign rights in ever wider fields, to which not only Member States but also their nationals are subject, with the guardians of that legal order being the Court of Justice of the European Union and the ordinary courts and tribunals of the Member States; |
H. |
whereas the Unified Patent Court must fully respect and apply Union law, in cooperation with the Court of Justice of the European Union as is the case for any national court; |
I. |
whereas the Unified Patent Court should rely on the case-law of the Court of Justice by requesting preliminary rulings in accordance with Article 267 TFEU; |
J. |
whereas respect for the primacy and proper application of Union law should be ensured on the basis of Articles 258, 259 and 260 TFEU; |
K. |
whereas the Unified Patent Court should be part of the judicial systems of the Contracting Member States, with exclusive competence for European patents with unitary effect and for European patents designating one or more Contracting Member States; |
L. |
whereas an efficient court system needs a decentralised first instance; |
M. |
whereas the efficiency of the litigation system depends on the quality and experience of the judges; |
N. |
whereas there should be one set of procedural rules applicable to proceedings before all divisions and instances of the court; |
O. |
whereas the Unified Patent Court should strive to provide high quality decisions without undue procedural delays, and should help, in particular, SMEs to protect their rights or to defend themselves against unsubstantiated claims or patents which merit revocation; |
1. |
Calls for the establishment of the Unified Patent Litigation System, as a fragmented market for patents and disparities in law enforcement hamper innovation and progress in the internal market, complicate the use of the patent system, are costly and prevent the effective protection of patent rights, particularly those of SMEs; |
2. |
Encourages Member States to conclude the negotiations and to ratify the international agreement (‘the Agreement’) between these Member States (‘Contracting Member States’) creating a Unified Patent Court (‘the Court’) without undue delays, and encourages Spain and Italy to consider joining in the enhanced cooperation procedure; |
3. |
Insists that the Court of Justice, as guardian of Union law, must ensure uniformity of the Union legal order and the primacy of European law in this context; |
4. |
Considers that the Member States which have not yet decided to participate in the enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection may participate in the Unified Patent Litigation System in respect of European patents valid on their territories; |
5. |
Stresses that the Unified Patent Court’s priority should be to enhance legal certainty and to improve the enforcement of patents while striking a fair balance between the interests of right holders and parties concerned; |
6. |
Stresses the need for a cost-efficient litigation system which is financed in such a way as to secure access to justice for all patent holders, particularly for SMEs, individuals and not-for-profit organisations; |
General approach
7. |
Acknowledges that the establishment of a coherent patent litigation system in the Member States taking part in the enhanced cooperation should be accomplished by the Agreement; |
8. |
Accordingly stresses that:
|
9. |
Welcomes the establishment of a mediation and arbitration centre within the framework of the Agreement; |
Structure of the Patent Litigation System
10. |
Considers that an efficient court and litigation system needs to be decentralised and is of the opinion that:
|
Composition of the Court and qualification of the Judges
11. |
Underlines that the efficiency of the litigation system depends most of all on the quality and experience of the judges; |
12. |
To that extent:
|
Procedure
13. |
Considers, with regard to the procedural issues, that:
|
Jurisdiction and effect of the Court decisions
14. |
Underlines that:
|
Substantive law
15. |
Is of the opinion that the Court should base its decisions on Union law, the Agreement, the European Patent Convention (EPC) and national law having been adopted in accordance with the EPC, provisions of international agreements applicable to patents and binding on all the Contracting Member States and national law of the Contracting Member States in the light of applicable Union law; |
16. |
Stresses that a European Patent with unitary effect should confer on its proprietor the right to prevent direct and indirect use of the invention by any third party not having the proprietor’s consent in the territories of the Contracting Member States, that the proprietor should be entitled to compensation for damages in case of an unlawful use of the invention and that the proprietor should be entitled to recover either the profit lost due to the infringement and other losses, an appropriate licence fee or the profit resulting from the unlawful use of the invention; |
o
o o
17. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States. |
(1) OJ L 76, 22.3.2011, p. 53.
(2) OJ C 211, 16.7.2011, p. 2.
(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1).