UPDATE: Luxembourg to get Appeals Court, Brussels I and the Unified Patent Court, and more news (UPDATED)

The AmeriKat pawing through
all of her e-mails...

Tonight, while her work colleagues are enjoying good wine, food and company at what would have been her first of this season's holiday parties, the AmeriKat has been busy sifting through the numerous rumors regarding the seat and seats of the Unified Patent Court, comments on the debates, and other e-mails that have landed in her tray (of the e-mail variety, not litter). Although it has been a quieter day in Brussels, she has sifted through all of the comments and has distilled the most interesting elements of the news for readers below. 

No news on Central Division seat, but did Luxembourg get the Appeals Court? 

Following last night’s press conference where President Pawlak stated that the only issue that was left to be decided was the seat of the Central Division, EUObserver today reported that 

“[u]nder the non-contentious parts of the deal, Luxembourg would get the appeals court, Slovenia and Portugal two mediation and arbitration centres and Hungary a training facility.” 

Fun Flag Fact: Often confused with
 the flag of the Netherlands, the  flag
of Luxembourg is derived from the
 colors of the Grand Duke's Coat of Arms .

UPDATED:  The Polish Presidency's website indeed confirms that the Council reached agreement that Luxembourg would be the seat of the Court of Appeal, Lisbon and Ljubljana would be the seats for the mediation and arbitration centers.  However, the AmeriKat has not found this reported in any official EU press release or document.  Is this indicative of a more cautious approach by the Commission while discussions are still afoot or an eager Polish Presidency?  Thank you to Chris Rycroft (Lewis Silkin) for alerting the AmeriKat to this announcement.    


The cities who are reported to be vying for the Central Division are London, Munich and Paris, but two Member States are arguing about the location of the Central Division. Commissioner Barnier said 

“I would find it very difficult that these two large countries won’t be able to support the measure because it is so important for the single market and they are of course the first ones to defend the single market …”

"Slow down, you're 
moving too fast.... "

EUObserver suggests that the Polish Presidency proposed Paris as the seat of the Central Division with Germany and UK disputing the location. In the context of the French Commissioner's comments and given that France is not particularly interested in the internal market (or are they?), it makes sense that the two countries are Germany and the UK (click here for post and comments on the identity of the Member States) that when the French Commissioner.  

No matter who they are, the effect of the two Member States’ disagreements have been instrumental in slowing down the speed of this process.  Some observers hope that this delay will allow more time to fully discuss the substantive provisions -- which the AmeriKat understands have yet to be agreed at all -- before an agreement on the entire patent package is reached.


Have we forgotten about Brussels I and the Unified Patent Court? 

"Don't forget to eat your Brussels sprouts!" -
but have we forgotten our Brussels I ?

Plonking into the Kat’s inbox today was  this document dated 2 December 2011 entitled “Relationship of the draft agreement on the Unified Patent Court with Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 Brussels I”. She has had little time to read this document but it reminded her that there are other issues, besides substantive patent law, that the unified patent system will affect. She will let the Kat’s intelligent and analytical readers digest the document and let the Kat know if they agree with the preliminary proposed solutions that are hoped to “arrange [the relationship between the Unified Patent Court and Brussels I] in a legally sound and certain manner.” See earlier IPKat post on previous EU documents addressing the compatibility of the patent provisions with Brussels I.  


Sitting, waiting, wishing - at a loss of what to do while EU ministers are in discussion?

For those readers who become restless in interim periods of inactivity, you may be wondering what there is to do while the EU Ministers are still in discussion. Like what the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys did today, you could write a Briefing Paper on the European Patent Proposals (click here). For those who enjoy the face-to-face interaction of speaking to their national government ministers and MEPs, a spot of old-fashion democratic engagement may be what the doctor ordered. However, given how late in the day these events have come and given their obvious political sensitivity how effective would that be? 

Has the time for Plan B come yet?

Professor Steve Peers of the University of Essex, who has followed many EU decision-making processes in the past, does not answer that exact question but has some interesting comments to say on the issue.  Right now, some Member States may be trying to achieving two things– trying to press for changes to the substantive text before it is officially adopted and pressing for the seat of the Central Division. Professor Peers warns that Member States run the risk of appearing contradictory in pressing  "to get hold of the seat of the court while criticizing the whole project in very strong terms”.  Taking this approach, especially given the brief time Member States have with the signing is due to take place on 22 December, would be counter-productive.  If amendments to the text are too difficult to obtain at this stage, a “Plan B” may be that suggested declarations to the treaty or the legislation are made:  "The clauses on review of the legislation or the treaty (or at least a declaration on review) could address some controversial issue [such as Articles 6 to 8]."  For more observations and suggestions from Professor Peers see here. 

And, finally… The AmeriKat has received some constructive criticism that the Kat has been overly critical regarding the unified patent proposals and debates. To be certain, the AmeriKat and the Kat welcome progress in establishing a single European patent system, but not at any costs or at the risk of ruining what could be a potentially beneficial and user-friendly system. And, in the words of many a Kat mom: “I nag because I care…”