Home » Patents » Location, Location, Location (of divisions of the Unified Patent Court)

Location, Location, Location (of divisions of the Unified Patent Court)

Keltie LLP

K2 IP Limited

About IPcopy

IPcopy is an intellectual property related news site covering a wide variety of IP related news and issues. We will also take the odd lighthearted look at IP. Feel free to contact us via the details on the About Us page.

Disclaimer: Unless stated otherwise, the contributors to IPcopy (the "IPcopy writers") are patent and trade mark attorneys or patent and trade mark assistants at Keltie LLP or are network attorneys at K2 IP Limited. Guest contributors will be identified.

This news site is the personal site of the contributors and is not edited by the authors' employer in any way. From time to time however IPcopy may publish practice notes, legal updates and marketing news from Keltie LLP or K2 IP Limited. Any such posts will be clearly marked.

This news site is for information purposes only. Information posted to this news site is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you require IP related legal advice please contact your legal representative.

For the avoidance of doubt Keltie LLP and K2 IP Limited have no liability as to the content of IPcopy and any related tweets or social media posts.

Privacy Policy

IPcopy’s Privacy Policy can be viewed here.

Unified patent courtAlong with all the other preparations that are required to implement the unitary patent package in the various participating member states, rumblings are often heard regarding the potential location of the local and regional divisions of the Unified Patent Court. This week IPcopy has heard/seen material relating to a potential local division in Ireland and also the possible setting up of a regional “Nordic-Baltic” division in Sweden, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania (Thanks to reader Hans van de Heuvel for the heads up regarding the Nordic-Baltic news).


The Bar Council of Ireland has recently sent a submission to Anne Coleman Dunne, the Head of Section at the Intellectual Property Unit in the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation regarding the possible establishment of a local division of the UPC in Ireland. The submission suggests that a decision not to establish a local division of the UPC in Ireland would:

convey the impression to investors that the intellectual property of high tech industries is not of real concern to Ireland, that Ireland in reality “does not do patents”, and that, despite the expertise available in Ireland, industries based in the high-tech centres such as Galway (life sciences), Cork/Limerick (pharmaceuticals) and Dublin (internet, computing and communications) will now have to find a remedy in the United Kingdom.

The submission goes on to present some very reasonable arguments in support of establishing a local division and also suggests that  a division of the High Court in Ireland could (in addition to setting up a local division of the UPC) be designated as a “Technology Court” to send a :

strong message to Irish businesses and foreign businesses considering investing here, that Irish people can provide both the necessary technological skills and the necessary specialised legal skills that the high tech industries require.

Denmark, Finland and Sweden/Latvia/Estonia/Lithunia

Hans van de Heuvel pointed us at an agreement that seems to be proposing a Nordic-Baltic regional division of the Unified Patent Court. An announcement apparently confirming this information can be found on the Latvian Cabinet of Ministers website – see here. As Hans points out the Agreement includes Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Sweden. Article 9 suggests that it is to be signed in Brussels on 4th March and Article 2 suggests that the division will hear cases in multiple locations in each of the signatory countries. Under Article 4, English will be the language of the proceedings.

Has anyone else heard of this agreement and the fact it may be signed next week?

As Hans pointed out notable absences in the region from this agreement are Denmark and Finland. IPcopy understands that Finland wanted a division which allowed Finnish as a designated language so maybe the language issue has raised its head again and kept Finland out of this agreement. According to this articlelanguage may also have been an issue for Denmark though IPcopy notes that, according to this Patlit blog article, Denmark may be considering setting up its own local division to try and avoid falling at the referendum hurdle.

Mark Richardson 27 February 2014

1 Comment

  1. Ingolfur Palsson says:

    I can confirm that the Danish Goverment has decided that if the referendum for the UPC is passed on May 25, 2014, then there will be established a Danish local division of the UPC. The reason for this appears to be bound to two reasons, the language, i.e. to have both English and Danish as the language of the courts, and it is rumored that the location of the court could not be agreed upon by the Danish and Swedish government.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: