The cost of securing patent protection in Europe has recently been attracting much adverse comment. In an attempt to respond to some of this criticism, the EPO implemented some fee reductions that became effective on July 1, 1997. These include a reduction in the combined application and search fees by about 20% and a reduction and deferment of the designation fees for the various countries designated in the application so that these will not have to be paid until examination is requested (i.e. after a search report has been issued). However, in the case of applications proceeding via the PCT route where payment of the examination fee is often due at the same time as one enters the regional phase, designation fees will still have to be paid at the time of entry into the regional phase.

There are two other main elements in the cost of European patents which attract criticism. The first is the need to provide a full translation of the text of the patent into the language of almost every country in which one wishes to have the patent take effect. The second is the need to pay annual maintenance fees in each country in which the patent is to be maintained. Clearly both of these touch upon issues of national sovereignty and present political difficulties to would-be reformers. However, to deal with the first issue the European Patent Office is exploring the possibility of requiring that only an "enhanced" abstract and the claims of a European Patent need be translated into the languages of all relevant countries at the time of grant and that full translation should be permitted to be deferred until a patent comes to be litigated. Indeed in a speech in Turin in October 1996, EPO, President Ingo Kober made it clear that it was EPO policy to effect such a change and claimed that it would reduce the average translation cost for a European Patent from DEM 22,000 to DEM 4,000. This proposal has been dubbed "the package solution". Whether this will ever be adopted by all countries is a matter for conjecture. At least one European country takes the view that it would be unconstitutional for any legal document similar to a patent to be effective in its territory unless it is in the national language.