Simmons and Linklaters among 20 firms backing inquiry into UK's post-Brexit patent court membership
Brick Court QC draws up legal opinion on 'critical' post-Brexit IP issue
September 28, 2016 at 06:49 AM
3 minute read
Simmons & Simmons, Linklaters and Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) are among 20 law firms supporting an investigation into the legality of the UK retaining membership of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) after the UK leaves the European Union (EU).
The legal opinion, published just over a week ago, states that it is possible for a non-EU member state to remain legally part of the UPC, provided that the UK is bound by EU law in the jurisdiction of the UPC.
The opinion was delivered by Richard Gordon QC of Brick Court Chambers, a specialist in constitutional and EU law, and his fellow Brick Court barrister Tom Pascoe.
Gordon and Pascoe were instructed and funded by industry bodies the IP Federation and the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys, as well as an informal consortium of 20 law firms set up by Simmons intellectual property (IP) head Rowan Freeland.
Other consortium members include CMS UK, Gowling WLG, Bird & Bird, Collyer Bristow, Browne Jacobson and European IP firms Carpmaels & Ransford and EIP.
Freeland said: "It was my idea. I chose the counsel and wrote the instructions and got people's comments. We sent the instructions to barristers in late July and they came up with their opinion a week and a bit ago."
Simmons IP partner Kevin Mooney was also involved in getting the group together.
Freeland continued: "The perception was that the UPC agreement is technically not an EU agreement; it is an agreement between member states. Our question was: if we're not a member state, can we be part of it? And if we can be, should we be?
"The interesting thing about this opinion is that it suggests you can have a relationship with the EU that is confined to the jurisdiction of the UPC."
Linklaters IP partner Nigel Jones commented: "It's a very interesting point and this clarification from counsel is very helpful in thinking through what the options are. There are hundreds of issues post-Brexit, which are viewed by relevant industry sectors and legal practice areas as critical – this is one of them."
Allen & Overy London IP litigation head Nicola Dagg added: "Richard Gordon QC's opinion analyses, in detail, the potential legal routes forward on the UPC. But the all-important issue is whether, in light of the UK's vote to leave the EU, there is any political will for the UK to be part of the UPC going forward, given that it would inevitably involve ceding a portion of sovereignty to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
"We tested support for the UPC with potential users of the court in a survey this June. Before the Brexit referendum, patent-heavy businesses believed the system would benefit their companies. However, at that point – with the spectre of Brexit looming – almost half said the UK's exit would make them rethink the proportion of patents they would opt out of the UPC system. The key question is what these potential users are thinking and planning now."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEU Parliament Gives Blessing to New EU Competition Chief Ribera Rodríguez
2 minute readSimpson Thacher Becomes Second Firm to Launch in Luxembourg in 2 Days With A&O Shearman Hires
3 minute readHSF Hires Trio for Luxembourg Launch, Builds Private Capital Practice
To Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250