Source: http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/polish-law/polish-act-on-patent-attorneys/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 04:18:54+00:00

Document:
On February 2012, the Polish patent attorney requested the President of the Polish Patent Office to delete her from the list of patent attorneys. She pointed out that due to lack of interest in services provided by her, she decided to return the Patent attorney identity card issued for her by the Polish Patent Office, and she also announced that on 18 October 2003, she has changed marital status and surnname. The PPO requested her to clarify the request. She did not respond to this properly delivered letter. On March 2012, The President of the PPO deleted the patent attorney from the list of professional representatives. She filed complaint against this decision.
The Voivodeship Administrative Court in its judgment of 29 august 2012 case file VI SA/Wa 912/12 dismissed the complaint. The Court ruled that the change of the surname of a patent attorney in connection with marriage does not cause a loss of power to conduct her professional activities, however, it may the basis to change of an entry in the list of patent attorneys. The PPO properly deleted the applicant from the list of patent attorneys as requested. The request left the PPO no chances to make any other decision than delivered.
Categories: Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys | Polish patent attorneys | Voivodeship Administrative Court.
On 26 January 2011, the Act of 24 September 2010 amending the Polish Act on Patent Attorneys, published in Journal of Laws No. 197, item 1308, came into force. According to recent changes Polish patent attorneys may now represent clients in matters related to combating unfair competition. Patent attorney whose practice is based on the employment agreement takes an independent position in the entity that employs him/her and is directly subordinate to the head of an organizational unit, and if the organizational unit employs two or more patent attorneys, one of them is responsible for coordinating the work done by all employees.
A patent law firm may be organized as a stock company in which only inscribed shares are allowed. The Act introduced also the obligation of professional development for patent attorneys. Meanwhile it liberalized advertising rules.
EU nationals who meet the conditions prescribed by law are allowed to practice in Poland. A foreign citizen has to be able to speak Polish language to the extent necessary to practice on the Polish territory, in particular, to act as a representative in proceedings before the Polish Patent Office, as well as in judicial and administrative courts.
The Act also introduces the rules on cross border services. These services are deemed as temporary and occasional activities of assistance in matters of industrial property that are performed by citizens of EU Member States or third country nationals who hold a long-term residence permit of the European Communities, which are also authorized to perform these actions in the Member State.
The person who wants to star cross-border services for the first time on the Polish territory, is required to submit to the National Council of Patent Attorneys a written statement regarding these services together with the certificate of profession translated into Polish, any document being a proof of nationality, and a copy of liability insurance.
A person who performs cross-border services in the Republic of Poland by representing a client in proceedings before administrative bodies or courts, is required to indicate to the authority conducting the proceedings a person who will be authorized to receive official letters in the Republic of Poland. In case of no indication of such a person, a letter will be delivered to the party represented, if he or she is a resident of the Republic of Poland. In other cases, a letter will be left on file with the effect of service, the body should instruct about such actions at the first delivery.
The Act also made changes with regard to patent attorneys’ traineeship (the scope, costs, final exams) and disciplinary responsibility of patent attorneys. The rules on suspending the professional activity were also introduced. The suspension has to take place if the patent attorney is employed in the Polish Patent Office, the administrative court, the European Patent Office or the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market, take the office of judge, become a notary, a bailiff, or the prosecutor, assessor or a notary public prosecutor, or being on traineeship for the mentioned above functions.
Categories: Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys | Polish patent attorneys.
According to the provisions of Articles 76a § 2, 3 and 4 of the Administrative Proceedings Code – APC – (in Polish: Kodeks postępowania administracyjnego) of 14 June 1960, published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No 30, item 168, consolidated text of 9 October 2000, Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No 98, item 1071 with subsequent amendments, a party may file copy of a document if it complies with the original one and its originality have been authenticated by a patent attorney acting as a representative. According to the recently amended Act on the authentication of documents, such documents should include: the signature of a patent attorney, the date and the venue for its preparation, and also on a request: the time of the transaction. If the document contains special features (annotations, corrections or damages) patent attorney will acknowledge it in the authentication. The authentication of originality that was included in the copy of the document has the nature of the official document. In special circumstances, the Patent Office may request a party to submit original documents.
Categories: Art. 76a APC | Art. 9 APAT | Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Administrative Proceedings Code | Polish patent attorneys | Polish Patent Office | regulations.
The Supreme Court in its judgment of 23 January 2009 case file III CZP 118/08 held that an advocate, legal advisor or patent attorney who is acting as a substitute representative cannot authenticate a copy of the basic power of attorney that was issued in the name of the primary proxy. The court also ruled that the defect in form of a pleading based on improper form of powers can be removed by a confirmation of a party that issued the primary POA. The court should assign the other party a reasonable time limit for supplementation of a pleading and POA.
Categories: case law | Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts | Polish Administrative Proceedings Code | Polish Civil Proceedings Code | Polish patent attorneys | Polish Supreme Court.
The Rules of Ethics for Patent Attorney Profession, PDF file, in Polish language. This is the unifed text with changes that were passed during IV National Convention of Patent Attorneys of 7 September 2005.
appropriate precision and conscientiousnes, acting in proper moderation and dignity.
Please note that Polish patent attorneys may represent clients in all industrial property law matters (i.e. patents, trademarks, designs, etc.) and there are no specific professions such as trademark agents/attorneys in Poland.
Categories: Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys | Polish law | Polish patent attorneys.
The Supreme Administrative Court in a judgment of 3 October 2005 case file II GSK 195/05 published in Orzecznictwo Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego i Wojewódzkich Sądów Administracyjnych 2006/2/65/199, ruled that according to the provisions of Article 9(1) of the Polish Act of 11 April 2001 on Patent Attorneys – APAT – (in Polish: ustawa o rzecznikach patentowych), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 49, item 509, with subsequent amendments, a patent attorney should act as agent in proceedings before the Polish Patent Office, Polish courts and other bodies deciding on industrial property matters. This article includes all forms of practice of the patent attorney (for the patent attorneys’ firm, for the employer and on the basis of civil contracts) and all matters of industrial property within the meaning of Article 2 of the APAT, that are decided in each of the aforementioned proceedings.
Categories: Art. 2 APAT | Art. 9 APAT | case law | Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish courts | Polish law | Polish patent attorneys | Polish Supreme Administrative Court.
Kulikowska & Kulikowski is a firm of patent attorneys (in Polish: kancelaria rzecznikow patentowych), constituted as a registered partnership. In the Polish legal system, there is no distinction between trade mark attorneys and patent attorneys: the legal profession, which deals with industrial property law, performs both those functions. The profession is regulated by the Act of 11 April 2001 on Patent Attorneys – APAT – (in Polish: ustawa o rzecznikach patentowych), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 49, item 509, with subsequent amendments, and is recognized by the Polish Code of Commercial Companies – CCC – (in Polish: Kodeks spółek handlowych) of 15 September 2000, published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 94, item. 1037, with subsequent amendments, as a profession of public trust.
In 2003, a year after making an offer to buy trade mark rights, which was turned down, K&K applied to the Polish Patent Office for the registration of the FLESZ trade mark for their own interest. There was rampant speculation that the law firm might have represented a client, the identity of whom they wished to keep secret in order to obtain the trade mark at a lower price. K&K initiated the proceedings to revoke the FLESZ trade mark registered in the name of Inco-Veritas in 1993. K&K based its claim on the fact that Inco-Veritas had ceased use of the mark for 5 years. The PPO discontinued the proceeding.
In 2005, K&K appealed to the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw. That court overturned the contested decision and ruled that the law firm could move for the revocation of the registered rights since the FLESZ trade mark had not been used. A court ruling to support K&K’s claim is needed for the PPO to let the firm register the trade mark for themselves.
Subsequently, Inco-Veritas filed the cassation complaint before the Polish Supreme Administrative Court (SAC). The Court ruled that K&K could not be a party in the lawsuit concerning the revocation of the rights in question because it lacked any proper interest to do so. The Court based its ruling on regulations included in the APA which provides that a law firm may provide services in the field of industrial property only to third parties. The SAC also ruled that such firms are not recognized as entrepreneurs as defined in Article 87(2) of the Act of 19 November 1999 on the Law of Economic Activity – ALEA – (in Polish: Prawo działalności gospodarczej), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 101, item 1178. This law will be valid till 2011. Moreover, the SAC judged that K&K, being a law firm of patent attorneys and a registered partnership, was a company of public confidence. Accordingly, trade mark registration for its own use might undermine its credibility. The Voivodeship Administrative Court’s verdict was reversed and remitted for reconsideration. In 2006, the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw confirmed SAC’s judgment and rejected K&K’s claim.
K&K filed a cassation suit to the Supreme Administrative Court claiming that article 87(2) of the ALEA and article 72 of the APA were inconsistent with the Polish Constitution with regard to the freedom to acquire property rights. The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 29 March 2007 case file II GSK 234/06 dismissed K&K’s suit and ruled that a patent attorney is not an entrepreneur and that the freedom of economic activities may be limited by important public interest. In this case, the limitation is recognized as the idea of “the profession of public confidence”. Judge Anna Robotowska said that it was clear that regulations limiting patent attorneys’ commercial activities are constitutional. The Court did not find it applicable to send the case to the Court of Justice of the European Communities because the lawsuit had begun in 2003, which is before Poland joined the European Union. The judgment confirmed that a Polish patent attorney’s prime role is to professionally represent clients seeking trade mark registration. Barring patent attorneys from registering trade marks in their own interest may also prevent them from unethical business practices.
Categories: Art. 2 APAT | Art. 4 APAT | Art. 72 APAT | case law | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Supreme Administrative Court | Voivodeship Administrative Court.
On the basis of Article 4, section 1, of the Polish Act of 11 April 2001 on Patent Attorneys – APAT – (in Polish: ustawa o rzecznikach patentowych), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 49, item 509, with subsequent amendments, the profession of a patent attorney is created to provide assistance in matters of industrial property: to private individuals, legal persons and entities without legal personality.
2) combating unfair competition in respect of items referred to in paragraph 1.
The scope of representation for matters relating to unfair competition has been recognized in the Act quite narrowly. It was confirmed by the Polish Supreme Court in its judgment of 16 October 2004 case file CK III 580/03, which was published in the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, the Civil Chamber (in Polish: Orzecznictwo Sądu Najwyższego Izba Cywilna) of 2005/9/164/109. The Court simply held that a patent attorney may be a representative in judicial proceedings, which are the subject of a claim arising from unfair competition in respect of items referred to in Article 2, section 1 of the APAT.
Categories: Art. 2 APAT | Art. 4 APAT | case law | Polish Act on Patent Attorneys | Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys | Polish courts | Polish law | Polish patent attorneys | Polish Supreme Court | review.

References: § 2
 Art. 76
 Art. 9
 Art. 2
 Art. 9
 Art. 2
 Art. 4
 Art. 72
 Art. 2
 Art. 4