SUEPO

News

• PSI letter re the ILO-AT

  (03/04/2013)
  
  

  The Global Union federation - Public Services International - lobbies the ILO Governing Body to address serious problems with the Legal Protection of international civil servants

• Interview with Paul Ernst

  (20/09/2011)
  
  

  In its June meeting the Administrative Council of the EPO decided to abolish its only recently created Audit Committee (see below). Mr. Paul Ernst, Member of the Audit Committee, comments in a SUEPO interview

• Meeting of the Administrative Council (29-30 June 2011)

  (17/06/2011, updated 02/07/2011)
  
  

  With an annual operation budget of close to 1.5 billion Euros the European Patent Organisation needs a strong governance mechanism to guarantee good practice and transparency.  This is particularly important since due to its immunity the EPO is not subject to the checks and balances common in most  national systems. 

  In order to improve the existing governance, the previous President, Ms  Brimelow, proposed the introduction of an Audit Committee (see CA/140/08). 

  The Administrative Council, at the time chaired by Mr Battistelli, approved the proposal (see CA/D 9/09).

  As President of the EPO, Mr Battistelli recently proposed to abolish the Audit Committee (CA/55/11).

  The Council, once again, approved.

  The Staff Union of the EPO considers the abolition of the Audit Committee premature and instead argues that further measures to strengthen good governance such as the introduction of a whistle-blower policy and a Code of Conduct are necessary before removing existing mechanisms. 

• Employment disputes at the EPO continue

  (08/05/2011)
  
  

  During the last decade the EPO has increasingly hired contract staff. This practice has been criticized by the staff representation of the EPO for circumventing its statutory rights for consultation and for putting the staff concerned in a legal vacuum. Following an internal appeal, the ILO Tribunal has instructed the Office in July 2010 to submit its out-sourcing policy for statutory consultation within 60 days. This has not yet happened.

  In the mean time two external staff members whose contracts were not prolonged filed a complaint against the intermediary (MBA) at a German court. Further information can be found in articles that appeared in Spiegel and SZ.

  A hearing at the second instance, the Landesarbeitsgericht München, took place on 18 May. The hearing lasted less than an hour. The presiding judge, Mr. Taubert, exerted extreme pressure on the complainants to settle the dispute rather than pursue their complaints. When this was refused the judge dismissed one of the complaints without giving any reasons and without hearing the complainant. Judge Taubert then turned to the second complainant and repeated his question whether the complainant would not rather settle. Visibly irritated by the continued refusal, he then stated that in this case her actual employment relation when working in the EPO could have been dependent and would require further investigation. A second hearing is to be scheduled to which two key witnesses from the EPO will be invited.

  Another complaint concerning the employment practices of the EPO is pending at the European Court of Human Rights (see FTP).

• 127th Meeting of the Administrative Council

  (31/03/2011)
  
  

  The Administrative Council met on 29th & 30th March in The Hague.

  The agenda can be found here.

  The discussions of the first day centered around the (confidential) Deloitte Finance Study commissioned by the President of the EPO, Mr. Battistelli.

  A topic of interest on the second day was CA/24/11, the first report of the newly established Audit Committee. In a short intervention (English version, German version), the staff representation expressed its appreciation for the work done by the Audit Committee and the positions expressed in the report, in particular concerning the necessity of a Code of Conduct and an anti-fraud policy supported by an effective whistle-blowing policy.

• L'état, c'est moi

  (16/02/2011)
  
  

  For employees of international organisations their employer is at the same time legislator and judge. In an interview with SUEPO Mr. Matthew Parish comments on this situation.

  Mr. Parish is an International lawyer specializing in sovereign and international dispute resolution. He is also the author of the book "Mirages of international justice" (preorder at Amazon)

• Interview with Jesper Kongstad

  (24/01/2011)
  
  

  The series of SUEPO interviews continues with an interview with Jesper Kongstad, Chairman of the Administrative Council and Director-General and CEO of the Danish Patent and Trademark Office.

  From the interview: "A more personal goal for me is that working with the new President of the Office, we will be able to create a much closer cooperation between the AC and the management of the Office, between the AC and staff, and indirectly between management and staff..."

• 126th Meeting of the Administrative Council

  (17/12/2010)
  
  

  The Administrative Council of the EPO met on 14 and 15 December in The Hague. The agenda (CA/146/10) was dominated by financial issues such as the budget for 2011 and questions concerning the financing of staff pensions and health insurance. Two documents were also presented (CA/155/10 and CA/156/10) which reported on the results of staff surveys held during the last months of the previous presidency. The Administrative Council noted with approval that discussions between the new administration and the staff representation about how to address these issues are ongoing.

• Interview with Prof. Peter Drahos

  (01/12/2010)
  
  

  In the series of SUEPO interviews Peter Drahos takes a critical view at the functioning of the global patent system. Peter Drahos is Professor in Law and Director of the Centre for the Governance of Knowledge and Development at the Australian National University Chair in Intellectual Property at Queen Mary, University of London. His latest book entitled "The Global Governance of Knowledge" is based on a detailed study of the patent systems of forty-five rich and poor countries.

  A citation from the interview: "The challenge for patent offices in the 21st century is whether they will take on more of a leadership role in networks made up of civil society, health departments, competition authorities and patent offices becoming champions of a people's social contract or whether they will spend their time handing out customer satisfaction surveys to their multinational clients and hoping for lots of ticks of approval. The latter, I predict, will do little for the morale of their examiners."

• Employment disputes at the ILO

  (12/11/2010)
  
  

  As reported previously, the staff representation at the EPO has criticized the Organisation for not respecting the rights of external staff employed within the Organsation. This week the staff representation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) issued a press release in which it also demands decent working conditions for their colleagues on flexible contracts. SUEPO sent a letter of support to the ILO Staff Union.

• 125th Meeting of the Administrative Council

  (21/10/2010, updated 29/10/2010)
  
  

  The Administrative Council of the EPO met from 26 to 28 October in The Hague. The agenda (CA/106/10 Rev. 1) was relatively short. The appointments of new Vice-Presidents for DG1 (search and examination) and for DG5 (legal matters) were amongst the more important internal matters. The successful candidates are Mr. Minnoye (BE) and Mr. Lutz (DE).Topics of interest for the external stakeholders include the amendments to the Implementing Regulations to Rule 71 EPC (CA/81/10 Rev. 1) and Rule 161 EPC (CA/134/10 Rev. 1 f). As expected, the proposals were approved by the Council.

• The accountability of international organisations

  (14/10/2010)
  
  

  Over at the Social Science Research Network, Matthew Parish has a fascinating essay on the problem of accountability of international organisations. Political oversight, Parish suggests, is generally weak, yet most international organisations seem to operate in a legal vacuum as well, with wide-ranging immunity from national legal proceedings. Parish's analysis concludes that the legal immunities enjoyed by international organisations are in need of review.

• "The Quality Factor in Patent Systems" - Bruno van Pottelsberghe

  (20/07/2010)
  
  

  Bruno van Pottelsberghe's latest paper, "The Quality Factor in Patent Systems" puts forward a new methodology that aims at comparing quality across patent systems.
  
  Quality is defined as the extent to which patent systems comply with their own patentability conditions in a transparent way. This definition makes it possible to gauge quality using a two-layer framework: the first layer is composed of the legal standards that describe the patentability conditions of a national patent system (subject-matter, novelty, inventiveness, fees). The second layer is characterised by the operational design put in place to meet those legal standards.

• Employment disputes at the EPO

  (12/07/2010, updated 27/07/2010)
  
  

  The staff representation has regularly criticised recruitment practice at the EPO. After numerous attempts to discuss the matter internally, last year the staff committee submitted a document (CA/174/09) on the employment conditions for external staff to the Administrative Council of the EPO. The document was ignored. Since then a number of complaints have been submitted to national courts. The press (Spiegel and SZ) has reported on these complaints.
  
  In the mean-time an internal appeal filed 4 years ago has matured into a judgment: ILO-AT 2919. The Tribunal ruled that the EPO's General Advisory Committee (GAC), in which the staff representation holds half of the seats, should have been consulted on the Office's outsourcing policy. This is not the only recent judgment on recruitment procedures filed by staff representatives in which the Tribunal found in favour of the complainant, see ILO-AT 2819, ILO-AT 2762, ILO-AT 2919, ILO-AT 2791 and, in the same session ILO-AT 2920 and ILO-AT 2921.
  
  It is noted, however, that the amount of damages and costs awarded to the complainants is diminishing. In the 2919 judgment the three complainants were awarded 300 Euros in costs, together. This represents about 1% of the real costs. The Tribunal further carefully avoided entering into the substance of the case. This means that if the EPO, after GAC consultation, decides to maintain the current practice a new appeal will have to be filed, on which a judgment can then be expected in 4 years.

• The 124th meeting of the AC, part 3.

  (30.06.2010)
  
  

  The 3rd day continued with topics to be discussed in closed session, amongst which further nominations and the level of compensation awarded to delegates. A decision on the Vice-President posts is only expected in October. The open part of the session resumed with a discussion on "Fee reform and sustainable financing of the European patent system" as outlined in CA/91/10, CA/82/10, CA/39/10, CA/38/10, CA/36/10, CA/34/10 and CA/33/10. Interestingly, only the representative of epi was critical of the Office's implicit position that major problems are caused by a large proportion of applicants "gaming" the system.
  
  The last day of the Council is traditionally the day on which staff matters are dealt with. True to form the proposal on reform of the financing of the sickness insurance, CA/66/10 Rev. 1 and Corr. 1, was the last item on the Council's 3-day agenda. The document was dealt with together with the Central Staff Committee's document CA/94/10 on the same topic. In a series of questions the Chairman of the Central Staff Committee highlighted the deficiencies of the proposal and the administration's failure to demonstrate clearly the need for such fundamental reform. Despite these interventions, 26 of the delegations, including France and Denmark, voted in favour, with 10 delegations abstaining and 1 voting against. With that the decision was passed.

• The 124th meeting of the AC, part 2.

  (29.06.2010)
  
  

  The most important point of the second day of the 124th Council meeting was the election of the new Chairman of the Administrative Council. Mr. Kongstad (DK) was the only candidate. Mr. Kongstad has in the past expressed himself strongly in favour of decentralisation. His view of the European Patent Network was one wherein the EPO would serve as a "back-office" to the national patent offices.
  
  Otherwise the meeting was largely uneventful. Amongst the documents on the agenda were CA/84/10 ("Progress report on the trilateral and IP5") submitted by the President and CA/93/10 ("Work-sharing from an examiner's perspective") submitted by the Central Staff Committee. Both were passed without a comment.
  
  The day ended with the selection of a new VP1 and VP5 in closed session, i.e. without the usual observers from industry (BusinessEurope) and the patent profession (epi), and without the Staff Committee or other Office staff. At the time of writing the outcome was not yet known.

• The 124th meeting of the AC, part 1.

  (28.06.2010)
  
  

  The first half day of the 124th meeting of the Administrative Council was relatively uneventful.
  
  The outgoing President, Ms. Brimelow, presented the 2009 activities report (CA/44/10). The efforts made by the Office to limit expenses and increase productivity have paid off. This has led to a positive operational result under IFRS and to a decrease in unit costs. In contrast positive results from the SPP project (Single Patent Process) would have to wait for her successor. The Office presented for the first time a document (CA/79/10 rev.1) on current trends of activity in the national patent offices and the EPO.
  
  The day ended with a discussion about the procedure for the upcoming selection of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Administrative Council, itself scheduled for tomorrow. Most delegations intervened in favour of more transparency.

• 124th Meeting of the Administrative Council

  (22/06/2010)
  
  

  The Administrative Council of the EPO will meet from 28 to 30 June in Munich. The agenda (CA/71/10) numbers about 60 points and a roughly equal number of supporting documents. The election of a new Chairman of the Administrative Council and the appointments of new Vice-Presidents for DG1 (search and examination) and for DG5 (legal matters) are amongst the more important internal matters to be dealt with. Topics of interest for the external stakeholder include those concerned with fee reforms, and with co-operation at European and at global level.

• EU Patent legislation - Accession of the European Union to the European Patent Organisation

  (13/05/2010)
  
  

  The Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO) has recently sent a letter to the Members of the European Parliament pleading for accession of the European Union to the European Patent Organisation.

• "Europe should stop taxing innovation" - Bruno van Pottelsberghe

  (12/04/2010)
  
  

  Bruno van Pottelsberghe has just published a policy brief entitled "Europe should stop taxing innovation". In this paper he argues the 'enhanced' patent system proposed by the Competitiveness Council in December 2009 may actually weaken the patent system in Europe.

• Richard Yung on the AC

  (16/03/2010)
  
  

  Richard Yung's views on the composition of the Administrative Council in the light of the recent Presidential election.

• Cost-benefit analysis of the community patent

  (15/01/2010)
  
  

  In December last year the EU Council has agreed on a number of conclusions on the main features of the Community Patent and the EU Patents Court. In the same month Jérôme Danguy and Bruno van Pottelsberghe published a working paper analysing the costs and benefits of the Community Patent. The main conclusion of the paper is that with a sensible level of fees the Community Patent should be beneficial for the business sector, the European Patent Office (EPO) and most of the National Patent Offices (NPOs), mainly due the abolition of translations and the avoidance of paralel litigations. Patent attorneys, lawyers specialised in patent litigation and translators would stand to lose part of their income, whereas both the EPO and the NPOs would risk to lose some of their power. According to the authors this provides an explanation for the observed resistance to the Community Patent.