IP2Innovate calls on the European Commission to strengthen EU law to ensure a balanced patent system and enhance Europe’s competitiveness

BRUSSELS, 25 March 2024 - IP2Innovate is calling for targeted amendments to EU intellectual property law to ensure that European patent courts consider the proportionality of remedies in their handling of patent litigation cases.

The proposed amendments will help create a more balanced patent system. This will spur innovation and, in turn, help to address Europe’s lagging competitiveness.

The 2004 EU IP Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) requires that remedies for patent infringement be applied in a proportionate manner, but courts are handing out injunctions to patent owners in effect automatically, without considering the disproportionate impact that may result.

Guidance issued by the European Commission in 2017, aimed at correcting the misapplication of the EU law, has not materially improved the situation.

An analysis of patent court rulings provided by Darts-ip, the leading source of global patent case data, for the period 2018-2020, shows that 99% of cases saw no proportionality assessment – compared with 99.7% of cases observed between 2015 and 2017.

Clearly the Commission’s 2017 Guidance has not brought a material change in the application of proportionality,” said Patrick Oliver, executive director of IP2Innovate. “We are pleased that the Commission is currently conducting a new study to examine the problem.”


German patent law reforms

Legal reforms adopted in June 2021 in Germany, where most EU patent litigation takes place, appear to have encouraged more defendants to view proportionality as a potentially viable defence to an injunction. Since the reform there have been at least 17 court cases where proportionality was pleaded by the defendant during a 15-month period, compared to only two cases over the preceding six-year period.

It is still too early to assess the real impact of the German reforms but early indications show that at least proportionality is being raised more frequently than before the reforms. “We are now callingfor proportionality to be further codified at the EU level through targeted legislative action, and for the next European Commission to include codification in its political priorities,” Mr Oliver said.

“Further codification is necessary to address an imbalance in Europe’s patent system that harms competitiveness and innovation in Europe”, he said. “It is possible that other Member States will follow Germany’s lead and we definitely would encourage this, especially given the fact that many Member States never explicitly transposed the IPRED’s proportionality requirement into their patent legislation. However, having clear EU rules to ensure a harmonized approach across the EU Single Market is essential to effectively enforce the application of the proportionality principles in patent litigations,”he said.

Codification at EU level should take the form of targeted amendments to the IPRED, to make it clear that a proportionality assessment must be undertaken by courts in deciding what remedy to grant, and to spell out the factors that courts should consider in deciding whether to grant, tailor or deny a permanent injunction and/or alternative remedy. Indeed, to foster and protect EU innovation, it is imperative that courts consider whether the remedy for a patent infringement claim would not result in a disproportionate impact.


UPC context

Ensuring the equitable resolution of patent litigation in the EU through the targeted amendment of the IPRED is of even more importance with the establishment of the Unified Patent Court (UPC). If automatic injunctions become the norm in the newly established UPC, innovative companies would face Europe-wide automatic injunctions and not just ones at national level.

With the arrival of the UPC, the stakes have increased, making it even more important to ensure that courts will consider the proportionality of the remedies sought by plaintiffs seeking injunctions on the grounds of a patent infringement. Proportionality will ensure that the interests of plaintiffs and defendants, as well as the public, are flexibly assessed to ensure a balance of the reasonable interests of all sides, which is especially critical in the case of complex consumer products. The threat of having a product taken off the entire European market would worsen the imbalance between patent owners and implementers.

“We believe that further codification of proportionality in EU law would ensure that proportionality is effectively applied at UPC level, as well as in national patent courts,” Mr Oliver said.

Notes for editors

(1) The analysis covered all court decisions in patent cases in Europe provided by Darts-ip, part of the analytics firm Clarivate, for the period between January 2015 and December 2020 in which an infringement was found and a permanent injunction was sought. In total, 635 court rulings from 15 EU Member States as well as from the UK and Norway were analysed. Proportionality was considered in only 4 out of 635 cases in which a permanent injunction to stop patent infringement was sought (0.6%). For the EU countries, proportionality was assessed in only 0.3% of cases (2 out of 628 cases).


For further information, please contact:

Patrick Oliver


Executive Director


Mobile: +32-477-597065


Other press releases

Managing IP

UPC take-up likely to be poor, say industry counsel

In its article on whether companies are likely to make use of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), Managing IP reports that implementers see the enforcement associated with the unitary patent as more of a threat than an opportunity due to the enormous number of applicable patents and therefore likely lawsuits for their infringement and associated defense.

SEP regulation: a step in the right direction

BRUSSELS, 28 April 2023 – IP2Innovate welcomes the European Commission’s proposal to reform the licensing of standard essential patents. “This initiative should at least help level the playing field when standard essential patents licensing is involved,” said Patrick Oliver, executive director of IP2Innovate. “The proposal isn’t as bold as it was a week ago, but it still has certain important reforms in place. Opponents of this reform have lobbied intensely for the Commission to abandon it. I hope that in an effort to compromise, the Commission hasn’t opened up loopholes that would undermine its effectiveness,” he added. IP2Innovate welcomes the Commission’s effort to inject much needed transparency into SEP licensing, limiting the instances where patent owners could abuse the system. In his press conference on 27 April, Commissioner Thierry Breton referred to how the current SEP system enables patent owners to extract excessive royalties. “He is right. This happens not only with SEPs but also in the broader patent system too,” said Mr Oliver, adding: "We hope he is also right when he says this practise will become impossible in the areas of SEPs, and that he then turns his attention to fixing related problems that plague the broader patents system in Europe.” IP2Innovate members collectively have thousands of European patents, including SEPs. They believe that patents play a vital role in the innovation process. But when the system is abused patents become an obstacle to innovation. And it’s not only happening with SEPs. Many patent assertion entities (PAEs) are in business to exploit the weaknesses in the system. IP2Innovate was established in 2016 to combat patent abuse by these PAEs, often referred to as patent trolls. It has been pushing for courts to move away from granting automatic injunctions in patent disputes, and instead apply remedies that are proportionate, especially when highly complex products are involved.

The UPC: time to get Europe’s house in order

Judges at the incoming court must consider the threat posed by patent assertion entities, comments Patrick Oliver of patent owners’ coalition IP2Innovate.
Back to overview

Subscribe to our newsletter

Privacy policy

© IP2Innovate 2024 - Website door Two Impress