WRITTEN QUESTION P-2578/00

by Johannes Blokland (EDD) to the Commission

(25 July 2000)

Subject: Restriction of the number of main languages in connection with the adoption of a uniform European patent scheme

The Commission is currently working on the development of a uniform European patent which is intended to become effective in all Union Member States as from the end of 2001.

1. Is it true that the new rules which are being drafted on this subject lay down that the patent need only be submitted in one of the three so-called main languages, French, English or German and that subsequently it need only be translated into the other two, and no longer, therefore, into all the official languages of the EU area?

2. In the Commission's view, how can this new rule be reconciled with the requirement laid down in the EU Treaty that the languages used in the Union must, by law, be treated equally?

3. In the Commission's view, how can this new rule be reconciled with the pronouncements of the European Parliament concerning the importance of equal treatment of languages in the EU and in particular with its repeated statements concerning the need for rules to be publicly accessible, inter alia through translation into the public's own languages?

4. Would not a system based on three main languages entail concealed distortion of competition and unequal treatment of members of the public/ potential applicants for patents who speak an official language of the Union other than the three aforementioned languages?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2000)

The Commission adopted its proposal for a regulation on the Community patent(1) on 5 July 2000. The proposed regulation aims at creating a Community patent which is affordable and which provides full legal certainty for industry. The Commission proposal on these aspects is both ambitious and balanced.

The intention is to make use of an existing and well functioning system: the Munich Convention. The Community would adhere to this Convention and the European Patent Office could then grant European patents, designating the Community (Community patent). The Community legislates therefore, in principle, only on the effects of a patent once it has been granted under the Munich Convention and does not therefore legislate on translation requirements relating to the processing of Community patent applications.

Under the Munich Convention, patent applicants may under certain circumstances file their applications in languages other than English, German or French. However, the Munich Convention then requires a translation into one of these three languages in order for the European Patent Office to be able to process the application.

Translation cost is one of the major reasons for the considerable expense involved in obtaining patent protection covering several states in Europe. The Commission therefore does not propose additional translation requirements compared to those provided in the Munich Convention for the grant of the patent. In this respect, the Commission proposal is balanced: a specific rule on damages allows a centralised court to find a reasonable solution in each case, where an alleged infringer is domiciled in a Member State, the official language of which is not the language in which the patent has been granted. Moreover, practice has shown that European patents are only in exceptional cases consulted in languages other than the language in which they are made available by the European Patent Office. For the above reasons, the Commission does not consider that the proposed Community patent system will cause the difficulties to which the Honourable Member refers.

(1) COM(2000) 412 final.