Preparing for change

What is a UP?

The filing and prosecution of European Patents at the EPO has not changed. On grant, a European Patent (EP) will continue to create the option for validation as a bundle of national rights but a unitary patent (UP) is also available via the EPO.

Requesting a UP, creates a single patent with unitary effect across all of the EU Member States that have ratified the UPC Agreement (R-MS). The EPO will examine the request for the UP which must be made within one month of the date of grant.

From 1 September 2024, the UP’s coverage consists of 18 EU MS, including Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands. For future UPs, if all participating EU MS ratify the UPCA, the UP will cover 24 EU MS. To obtain coverage in other EPC countries, however, patentees still need to validate nationally in those EPC states.

To be eligible for a UP request, the EP application must grant with the same set of claims for all 25 EU MS who agreed to enhanced cooperation for unitary patent protection; they must all also be designated. [1] The request for unitary effect and required translation must be made within one month of grant of the EP. The one-month deadline is non-extendable. Refusals of a request by the EPO for grant of a UP can be appealed to the UPC.

The UP covers the territories of R-MS at the date of the registration of the unitary effect of the individual patent. Coverage of a UP is fixed throughout its lifetime and cannot be extended to EU MS that join the UPC at a later date.

The UP is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the UPC and cannot be opted-out.

Renewal fees for a UP are payable to the EPO in Euros. The EPO has set the renewal fees as equivalent to the combined renewal fees that would be payable in the four countries where EPs were most often validated in 2015. Although the UP is significantly more cost-effective than a widely-validated classical EP, because the UP is a unitary right, it is not possible to reduce the annual renewal fees by tapering the R-MS territories during the lifetime of the patent.

Year Unitary Patent (EUR) Equivalent cost of renewal in 25 separate member states (EUR)*
2 35 220
3 105 1452
4 145 1857
5 315 2506
6 475 3250
7 630 3861
8 815 4615
9 990 5554
10 1175 6463
11 1460 7526
12 1775 8655
13 2105 9854
14 2455 11028
15 2830 1219
16 3240 13569
17 3640 14912
18 4055 16166
19 4455 17729
20 4855 19227
Total 35555 160633

The chart below shows the relative cumulative costs of an EP patent granted at year 6 (i.e. validation costs + renewal costs at year 6) and then the subsequent renewal costs from year 7 onwards, including official and professional fees. Assuming the patent was granted in year 6, validation and renewal costs become payable on grant. Depending on where the EP patent is validated, the cumulative costs will vary. A UP represents a substantial cost saving over the lifetime of the patent compared to separately validated EPs in 4 or more UP countries, however, it is important to remember that as a unitary right, a UP patent must be renewed as a whole, whereas EP patents validated may be renewed, or not, separately.

These figures are shown as a guide for a specification filed in English having 15 claims. If you would like a detailed cost estimate for EP vs UP validation, please contact our UPC ready team – [email protected].

Since its inception, over 23,100 requests for a UP have been made and over 22,500 UPs have been registered. In 2023 the uptake rate of UPs was 17.5% and thus far in 2024 it has increased to over 23%.

[1] This includes Poland who has not signed the UPC Agreement but who was part of the enhanced cooperation in the creation of the unitary patent protection and thus treated as a participating Member State for the purposes of EU Regulation No. 1257/2012.  On grant, the UP does not and will cover Poland. Future UPs will cover Poland should it decide to sign and ratify the UPC Agreement at a later date.

*Based on national renewal fees as at 1 January 2020.

What is the Unified Patent Court?

The UPC is a new common patents court with exclusive jurisdiction in respect of litigation (validity and infringement) for all EP(UPs) and non-exclusive jurisdiction over EPs validated in R-MS.

Preparing for change

On 1 June 2023, The Unified Patent Court (UPC) and a new “unitary patent” or “European patent with unitary effect” (UP) became a reality.

How do I opt-out of the UPC?

When the UPC comes into force, all existing and future European patents that are granted and validated in R-MS territories will become subject to the jurisdiction of the court.

Latest updates

With the EPO and UPC adopting different frameworks for inventive step, is there potential for conflicting decisions?

The EPO regularly applies the problem and solution approach when deciding whether an invention involves an inventive step.  Central to this approach is identifying the technical differences between the invention …

Read article

Paris Central Division of the UPC has provided guidance on what constitutes common general knowledge (“CGK”)

Netherlands B.V. v VMR Products LLC [UPC_CFI_307/2023] –Paris Central Division (Catalozzi, Zhilova, Tillmann) – 29 November 2024 The Paris Central Division of the UPC has provided guidance on what constitutes …

Read article

UPC Court of Appeal Remits Meril’s request to stay infringement proceedings pending the outcome of EPO opposition

Meril Life Sciences PVT Limited & ors v Edwards Lifesciences Corporation [UPC-CoA-551/2024] –Court of Appeal of the UPC (Grabinski, Blok, Gougé) – 21 November 2024 The UPC’s First Panel of …

Read article

Central Division takes pragmatic approach to late-filed submissions and revokes VMR’s patent for lack of inventive step

In Njoy v VMR (UPC_CFI_308/2023), the Paris Central Division confirmed that the “front loaded” provisions of the UPC should be interpreted in line with the principles of proportionality and procedural …

Read article

UPC first FRAND judgment results in injunction against OPPO

Panasonic Holdings Corporation v Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd & anor UPC_CFI_210/2023 – Mannheim Local Division (Tochtermann, Böttcher, Brinkman & Loibner) – 22 November 2024. The UPC issued its …

Read article

Edwards v Meril confirms UPC’s jurisdiction over acts of infringement before the court came into force

In Edwards v Meril (UPC_CGI_15/2023), the UPC’s Munich local division refused to stay infringement proceedings pending an appeal on the central division’s finding of validity of the patent in amended …

Read article

Njoy v Juul finds the patent's underlying problem despite no mention of the problem in the specification

In Njoy v Juul (UPC CFI 315 /2023), the Paris Division of the Central Division provides further insight into the UPC’s approach to inventive step. Of critical importance in assessing …

Read article

Prospect of successful attempt at “Gilette Defence” fizzles out in SodaStream v Aarke with Aarke found to infringe SodaStream’s patent

In SodaStream v Aarke (UPC_CFI_373/2023), the UPC’s Dusseldorf local division has given us further insight into the UPC’s approach to claim interpretation. The court held that, if the patent distinguishes …

Read article