JURISDICTION REPORT: BELGIUM
MAJOR REVISION OF THE PATENT ACT COMING UP
Michaël Beck IPLodge
Te most significant revision of Belgian patent
law since the 1984
Patent Act was approved by the Belgian legislator on January 10, 2011. Aſter careful preparation of the required changes to the implementing regulations, and in synchronisation with efforts by the patent offices of Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg to introduce a joint electronic patent platform, the revised Patent Act is expected to enter into force early in 2014. Te revision is meant to bring Belgian patent law into compliance with the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) and to align substantive patent law with the provisions of the European Patent Convention as revised in 2000 (EPC 2000).
Te purpose of the PLT is to harmonise certain essential points of procedural patent law between the contracting states. When the PLT was concluded in 2000, Belgium was among the original signatories. Until now, Belgium has neither ratified the treaty nor brought its internal law in compliance with its provisions, but that will change with the present revision. Most importantly, the revised Belgian patent act will have a lower threshold for according a filing date to a patent application and offer a more generally applicable procedure for re-establishing lost rights if due care can be proved.
It is important to note that the re-establishment procedure will also apply to a failure to file the required translation of a European patent to be validated in Belgium, an omission for which no redress was possible until now (readers are reminded that Belgium is not a party to the London Agreement, and that filing a translation remains necessary for European patents granted in English).
EPC 2000, which entered into force on December 13, 2007, not only adapted the EPC to the requirements of the PLT (the European Patent Organisation is a signatory of the PLT as an intergovernmental organisation), but also introduced a number of changes to substantive patent law. As far as the effect of these changes on European patent applications and European patents validated in Belgium is concerned, the applicability of EPC 2000 is ensured in part by the self-executing nature of the latter’s provisions and in part by the explicit provisions of the 2007 act that implements EPC 2000.
Te present amendments to the Belgian Patent Act harmonise the substantive provisions governing Belgian patents with those governing European patents under EPC 2000. Accordingly, the Patent Act will now have a TRIPS-compliant definition of the domain in which Belgian patents may be granted (“in all fields of technology”, cfr. Article 52[1] EPC 2000), an explicit legal basis for the patentability of further medical indications (cfr. Article 54[5] EPC 2000), and clear instructions to consider equivalents of elements of the claims when determining the scope of protection of a
www.worldipreview.com
“THE REVISION OF THE PATENT ACT TAKES CARE OF SOME MINOR INCONSISTENCIES IN THE LAW AND INTRODUCES SOME CHANGES OF A GENERAL NATURE, SUCH AS PROVISIONS TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC FILING.”
patent (cfr. Article 2 of the Protocol on the Interpretation of Article 69 EPC).
Finally, the revision of the Patent Act takes care of some minor
inconsistencies in the law and introduces some changes of a general nature, such as the publication of all patent applications 18 months aſter filing or priority date (even if a patent is not granted at that time), provisions to allow electronic filing and prosecution of patent applications, and a systematic treatment of revocation and renunciation of patents by their proprietor.
For a number of years now, companies subject to Belgian corporate tax and with a distinct research division have been able to benefit from a significant reduction of the taxes due on income that can be attributed to patented inventions, provided that a patent is in force either in the country of production or the country of sale. Tis measure has increased many applicants’ interest in the quick and sure national route to Belgian patents (as opposed to the Patent Cooperation Treaty route and the European route, which involve substantive examination of patent applications).
As of income year 2013, the requirement of having a proper research division is waived for small sized enterprises, such that the tax benefits associated with patenting commercially important inventions will now be available to even the smallest companies. In this context, the present modernisation of Belgian patent law, both at the procedural level and at the substantive level, is certainly welcome.
Michaël Beck is a partner at IPLodge. He can be contacted at:
michael.beck@
iplodge.be
World Intellectual Property Review September/October 2013 161
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196