Motion on the project for a European Patent Court

Motion on the project for a European Patent Court, 1 juli 2012.

Een academische motie ingezonden door Fernand DE VISSCHER, maître de conférences invité à Katholieke Universiteit Leuven en professor Bernard REMICHE, professeur  aan de Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Vanwege academici (en advocaten) vanuit verschillende hoeken in Europa nopens de compatibiliteit van het vooropgestelde systeem met de Europese Verdragen, met verzoek/aanbod om zich bij deze motie aan te sluiten (support messages to be sent to : bernard.remiche@uclouvain.be or to: fernand.devisscher@uclouvain.be).

"The undersigned professors of Law and lawyers consider it necessary to draw attention to the situation of the project for a European court system specifically for patents on inventions.

[...] On 8 March 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union gave a negative opinion on the draft treaty submitted by the Council. It declared this draft incompatible with the European Union Treaty and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (opinion n° 1/109).
Thereafter the draft treaty was amended with particular regard to the objections made by the Court.
Nevertheless, serious doubts have been expressed on the conformity of the new draft with these objections.

In the main these doubts arise from the fact that the draft deprives the national courts of their own jurisdiction on those matters under consideration, hence depriving those taking legal action (companies) from being judged by them while, according to the Court, the European Union judicial system is founded upon joint cooperation between EU and national courts.

We would like to draw attention to the fact that the opinion of the Legal Department of the Council was sought on the compatibility of the modified draft with that of the Court. Public access to the complete wording of this opinion has been prohibited (Council document 15856/11 of 21 October 2011; refusal of disclosure confirmed by the Council: see doc. 5926/12 of 2 March 2012, adopted at a meeting on 8 March).
If this opinion concludes that the modified project conforms to the Treaties, it is not apparent why the content is inaccessible to the public.

This secrecy reinforces the doubts expressed beforehand and elsewhere (see also the Luxembourg delegation’s note of 11 July 2011, Council document 12704/11, item 1).

Without making any pronouncement on whether these doubts are well-founded, we consider them reasonable and that they must be dispelled.

Current discussions on the locations of the various institutions in the future court system and the rules for procedure seem premature and pointless if, as these doubts would lead us to believe, it is later determined that the whole system is illegal because this court system would have been instigated in violation of the European Union Treaty and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

The right to legal security for those embarking on legal actions (European companies) is thus called into question. What will be the consequences for the judgments which may be made under this system?

Moreover, at institutional and budgetary levels, it is at the very least inadequate to already sign a draft project, to undertake work on adapting other texts (particularly the Munich Convention, the Lugano Convention, and Regulation 44/2001), to seek ratification by Member States and to allocate substantial budgets to establish this court system. All this work and substantial expense may be incurred to no avail.
On the contrary and in the legitimate and democratic concern for legal security and public expenditure, we believe it is vital and urgent to throw light upon this precise legal issue of the very principle of a court with international authority and which excludes the jurisdiction of Member State courts.

If possible, a new opinion on this fundamental point should be sought from the Court of Justice.
Examining this issue will not unduly delay the progress of the project. On the contrary, this could then make more rapid progress if it were endowed with a better legal security. Moreover, the time taken for this opinion could be profitably used to overcome some already apparent flaws in the project and to develop the very many rules of procedure which will have to be adopted for the proposed new court system. Industry has additionally and often made it known that it wants to be made aware of the system in all its procedural and practical details before expressing a definitive opinion.

Moreover, we regret that this process of discussion and adoption of a project which is so important for European companies is not being openly conducted. It is not just that the above opinion has been made secret; this is also true for document 18239/11 of 6 December 2011 containing a proposal for compromise on various important aspects of the project (refusal of disclosure: document 6051/12 of 2 March 2012, adopted at the Council meeting on 8 March).

Public debate is even more necessary since the project, in its last known state, also incited a great deal of criticism at several levels, for the practical implications, the quality of judges, the cost to companies, etc.

The signatories to this petition invite their colleagues throughout Europe to give their support to this motion.
(support messages to be sent to : bernard.remiche@uclouvain.be or to:  fernand.devisscher@uclouvain.be).

Afbeelding: CC-BY, Vectorportal op flickr