The Community patent and the patent system in Europe, with evidence / House of Lords, Select committee on the European Communities.

  • Great Britain. Parliment. House of Lords. Select Committee on the European Communities.
Date:
1998
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: The Community patent and the patent system in Europe, with evidence / House of Lords, Select committee on the European Communities. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    44/144 (page 12)
    [Chairman Contd] advantages of flexibility in having a Convention, I think? (Dr Reid) 1am not so sure. The experience with the European Patent Convention is somewhat unsatisfactory. We have had this interaction with Community policy where there have been Directives to the European Union states which indirectly then have led to changes in practice in the European Patent Office and changes in the European Patent Convention, at least in how it is applied. I am trying to think of good reasons why one would go for a Convention. 61. If we had a Convention would we not have greater flexibility in the judicial arrangements we can make? If we went for regulation we would be stuck with the two available European courts, the Court of First Instance and the ECJ? (Professor Adams) Unless we had a separate Convention on the judicial arrangements on both sides. 62. But that would need a separate Convention? (Professor Adams) That would need a separate Convention, yes. 63. There are just one or two other things I would like to pick up because we are beginning to run out of time. You mentioned that there might be problems over the principle of exhaustion of rights, which I understand to mean that if you sold the product you could not complain about its being re-exported to another Community country. What are the problems that you have in mind? (Dr Reid) I think it is a somewhat farfetched one, but the line of reasoning is that after introduction of a Community patent perhaps the Court of Justice would hold that where you had a bundle of patents through the European Patent Convention, so the old current system, and you had not filed in country X, the export from that country of a product that you had not explicitly consented to be sold there yourself, could not be stopped in a country where you did have a national patent because the mere fact of not filing would be treated as implied consent. I think that is farfetched but people want the point made as a way to remove it. There is a danger, of course, that if you make the point you bring it to people’s attention and it may have the opposite effect, but there we are. Chairman] Do there remain any questions Members of the Committee would like to ask while we have the benefit of our witnesses’ advice? Lord Plant of Highfield 64. One of the questions that I think has not been put to Professor Adams and Dr Reid is: would the Community patent be likely to render the national patent system redundant? (Dr Reid) We could compare ourselves with the United States back when it was first formed: they had state patents. It would rather surprise me if, in the year 2080, there were national patents as we know them now, but any such change is many years away. New systems will need to be tested in terms of effectiveness. Also perhaps we will have different arrangements. We could have a spread system of patent granting, not just in Munich or Munich and The Hague. We could have Community patents granted in Newport, where our National Patent Office is, in Stockholm etcetera, but all as part of a European system. 65. How does it work in the United States? Do they have district offices there? (Dr Reid) No. 66. A single patent office? (Dr Reid) Only in Washington. It seems to me somewhat old-fashioned to be so fixed. The national patent offices could develop new roles. But at the moment I think you will get consistent evidence from us all that the national patent offices should be preserved, in parallel with the European (EPC) patent system. Chairman] Thank you very much, that has been extremely helpful. We are most grateful to you.