In recent years the European patent system has been subjected to a number of criticisms mainly in connection with the cost of translation of patents when granted by the European Patent Office into the languages of the member states and is a result of the lack of any harmonized approach to questions of patent enforcement.
In the summer of 1999, an intergovernmental conference of the members of the European Patent Convention convened by the French government to review the European patent system focused on the twin objectives of reducing the costs of European Patents and harmonizing patent litigation throughout Europe.
To these ends, working parties have been set up to consider practical ways to achieve the following objectives:
1. Reduction of the cost of translation-related costs incurred in obtaining a European patent by 50%
2. Improvement of the quality of patent litigation including the preparation of a draft text for an optional protocol that would provide for ?an integrated judicial system, including uniform rules of procedure and a common court of appeal for handling litigation relating to European patents."
The Conference also called upon the EPO to amend its procedures so that the average time taken to secure grant of a European patent would be reduced to three years, to examine whether a grace period for filing applications after publication by the inventor should be introduced into the European Patent Convention and to prepare a revised text of the European Patent Convention that would clarify the law relating to patentability of computer software.
Finally the Conference agreed that the results of the endeavors that it had set in motion should be reviewed by a further conference in 2000 with a view to adopting appropriate revision of the European Patent Convention before January 1, 2001.
In the summer of 2000, the Commission of the European Union put forward its own proposals for reform of the European Patent System which would involve the joining of the EPC by the European Union as a combined entity for which a sing;e patent might be granted. Such a patent would exist in the language in which the application had been prosecuted (i.e. English French or German) except for the claims which would have to be in English, French and German. Additionally, the Commission proposed that a new court system be set up to have jurisdiction over all patent disputes throughout Europe. [14]
[14] An attempt to have the EPC's translation requirements held to be in conflict with the European Community Treaty failed in BASF v. German Patent Office, in which the European Court of Justice held that national laws requiring translation of European Patents before they become effective would only become a violation of the Treaty of Rome if distortions in the flow of patented goods that might result from differences in the patent situation in different countries arising from the translation requirement were clear and direct. The Court held that in fact the repercussions of the requirement were too uncertain and indirect for them to result in it being appropriate to hold the translation requirement to be unlawful.
