The
Agreement on a Unified Patent Court establishes the court as a court of the member states. As a court established by treaty participating in the interoperation of
European Union law, it bears similarities to the
Benelux Court of Justice. An initial proposal, which shared many similarities with the proposed
European Patent Litigation Agreement and included non-EU countries, was found to be incompatible with EU law by the
Court of Justice of the European Union, as it would lead to a court not falling fully within the legal system of the European Union, thus being without the possibility to ask prejudicial questions to the EU court of justice. As a result, the court was established by an
intergovernmental treaty between the participating states outside the framework of the EU but open only to members of the EU.
Signatures The agreement was signed on 19 February 2013 in Brussels by 24 states, including all states participating in the enhanced cooperation measures except
Bulgaria and
Poland, while
Italy, which did not join the enhanced cooperation measures, did sign the UPC agreement. It is open to any member state of the European Union (whether they participated in the unitary patent or not), but it is not to other parties to the European Patent Convention. Bulgaria signed the agreement on 5 March after it had finalised its internal procedures. Meanwhile, Poland decided to wait to see how the new patent system works before joining because of concerns that it would harm its economy. While Italy did not originally participate in the unitary patent regulations, it formally joined them in September 2015. Regardless of the outcome of that process, becoming a party to the UPC agreement will allow the court to handle European patents in force in the country. Spain and Croatia (the latter would
accede to the EU in July 2013) are the only EU member states not participating in either the UPC or the unitary patent, but both countries may accede to the unitary patent system at any time.
Entry into force The agreement entered into force for the first group of 17 ratifiers on June 1, 2023, the first day of the fourth month after all of these three conditions were met: Preselection of candidate UPC judges took place in 2014, with the first training activities taking place in 2015. Rules regarding representation before the court were provisionally approved in September 2015. They include the requirements for the
European Patent Litigation Certificate (for which academic courses will be accredited) as well as equivalent certificates that are accepted during a transition period. Patent attorneys with a law degree are exempted from the EPLC.
Provisional application Discussions on a
Protocol to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court on Provisional Application were closed in September 2015. The protocol was signed by eight states on 7 October 2015: Denmark, Germany, Hungary, France, Luxembourg, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
Provisional application allows the hiring of judges and moving to the court premises. Provisional application started on 19 January 2022
Adoption of formal rules In its inaugural meeting in February 2022, the Administrative Committee approved the Rules on the European Patent Litigation Certificate and other appropriate qualifications, UPC Service and Staff Regulations and Financial Regulations.
Select committee Beside the completion of the work of the Preparatory Committee, the EPO Select Committee performs preparatory work for implementation of the
unitary patent, to be "completed in due time before the entry into operation of the UPC", as unitary patent regulations apply from the date that the UPC agreement enters into force. As of June 2015, the Select Committee expected to complete its work in Autumn 2015.
Ratification In October 2013, European Council President
Herman Van Rompuy stated that the "dream of a single patent still isn't fully fulfilled", and he "urged the EU's member states to ratify the agreement". A list of signatory countries and ratifiers is shown below. The
Danish People's Party and
Red-Green Alliance, which controlled enough seats in the Folketing (22 and 12 respectively, or a little more than one sixth of the 179 seats) to block ratification without referendum, stated that a referendum should be held. After a parliamentary agreement could not be reached, a
UPC referendum was held, together with the
EP election, on 25 May 2014. The Danish constitution states that the referendum defaults to a yes result unless at least 30% of all eligible to vote and more than 50% if the votes cast vote no. The referendum resulted in 62.5% yes votes, The complaint alleged a violation of the right to democracy, "democratic deficits and deficits in rule of law with regard to the regulatory powers of the organs of the UPC", "perceived lack of an independent judiciary under the UPC" and nonconformance of the UPC with EU law. It was believed that the last ground of the complaint, the alleged incompatibility of the UPC Agreement with EU law, might lead the Federal Constitutional Court to refer one or more questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), "which would mean a further delay of at least 15-24 months". The complaint was upheld on 20 March 2020 with regards to the unconstitutionality of the parliamentary procedure approving the agreement in the
Bundestag. The German government introduced a new bill to ratify the agreement, with the required two-thirds majority, to Parliament in June 2020. In December 2020, after the new bill had been approved by both the
Bundestag and the
Bundesrat, two new constitutional complaints were filed against the new bill. These complaints led the
Federal Constitutional Court to ask the German President not to sign the law. However, they were ruled inadmissible by the court in July 2021. ;Ireland Ratification in Ireland would require a constitutional amendment, approved by referendum. A referendum was initially scheduled for the autumn of 2013, but it was subsequently postponed to an unscheduled date after the
2014 European Parliament election.
Richard Bruton, the
Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation confirmed in May 2014 that a constitutional referendum would be held but that the timing had not been decided by the government. The Irish government later revealed in its legislation programme that it has planned to publish the required "Amendment of the Constitution" bill in 2015 to amend Article 29 of the Constitution to recognise the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, and after parliamentary approval will be put to a referendum. In May 2015,
James Reilly, the
Minister for Children and Youth Affairs stated that his government did not plan to hold any referendums during the remainder of its legislative term and so the Irish referendum and the ratification of the UPC would be postponed to after April 2016. In January 2024,
Simon Coveney, the
Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, published a general scheme for a constitutional amendment, with the government proposing a referendum to be held in June 2024, to coincide with the
2024 European Parliament election. The
Forty-first Amendment of the Constitution (Agreement on a Unified Patent Court) Bill 2024 was published on 15 February 2024. In April 2024 the government announced that the referendum was postponed, and would not take place in June. ;Netherlands In the Netherlands, European patents apply to the whole
Kingdom, except for
Aruba. The ratification by the Netherlands in 2016 however only applied to the European part of the Kingdom. On the request of
Curaçao and
Sint Maarten, and after a positive advice by the European Commission, the application was extended to
Curaçao and
Sint Maarten as well as
Bonaire,
Sint Eustatius and
Saba. ;United Kingdom In the United Kingdom, there is no requirement for a formal law approving of treaties before their ratification, but the
Ponsonby Rule is that they are laid before Parliament with an explanatory memorandum, which the government did for the UPC Agreement on 23 June 2013. The Intellectual Property Act 2014 was approved by Parliament and entered into force on 14 May 2014. Section 17 empowers the
Secretary of State to make provision by order for giving effect in the United Kingdom to jurisdiction for the Unified Patent Court if a draft of the order has been approved by Parliament. That means that ratification of the UPC agreement will not take place before Parliament's approval of the related implementation orders. The first order, the Patents (European Patent with Unitary Effect and Unified Patent Court) Order 2015, was submitted by the government on 10 June 2014 for a technical review with a 2 September 2014 deadline for replies. In June 2015, the
UK Intellectual Property Office stated, "It is the Government's intention for our domestic preparations [for ratification of the UPC] to be completed by Spring 2016". The Government laid the domestic implementing order before Parliament 21 January 2016. A second Statutory Instrument is needed to endorse the UPC Protocol on Privileges and Immunities, which the UK signed on 14 December 2016. The second Statutory Instrument will need to be finalised and laid before the Westminster and Scottish Parliaments, which will subject the Statutory Instrument to an affirmative procedure in order to complete the ratification of the UPC. The UK government announced on 27 February 2020 that "the UK will not be seeking involvement in the UP/UPC system. Participating in a court that applies EU law and [that is] bound by the CJEU is inconsistent with our aims of becoming an independent self-governing nation." On 20 July 2020 the UK formally withdrew its ratification of the treaty. In a 523–98 vote, the European Parliament approved an amended version of the amendment on 15 April 2014. The same amendment was adopted by the Council of the European Union in an
Ecofin Council meeting on 6 May 2014, and it formally entered into force on 30 May 2014 as Regulation 542/2014. Regulation 542/2014 amends the recast Brussels I Regulation 1215/2012, which is applicable from January 2015, and asserts that the Unified Patent Court has jurisdiction within the European Union if a contracting state to the Agreement would have jurisdiction in a matter that is regulated by the Agreement. It also renders the jurisdiction rules applicable in cases between parties in one EU country and parties in a non-EU country, a situation in which national law, rather than EU law, normally applies. ==Legal challenges==