< Back to latest news & events

Knowledge Hub

Recording transactions at the EPO: New practice for signatures on evidence

March 2024

From 1 April 2024, the EPO will accept digital or text string signatures as alternatives to handwritten or facsimile signatures on contracts and declarations submitted as evidence to support requests for registrations of transfers and licenses.

Furthermore, provided the position of the signatory who is entitled to sign is expressly indicated in the supporting evidence, that entitlement to sign will no longer be checked by the EPO.

These changes will simplify the registration process for applicants and are more aligned to many other major jurisdictions and IP offices already accepting electronic signatures on assignments and licences, so supporting evidence can be used more consistently.  The new rules will also apply to transactions concerning Unitary Patents (registered at the EPO).

Background

The new Notice from the EPO, when it comes into force on 1 April 2024, sets out that:

“ With a view to simplifying its procedures and promoting digital transformation, the European Patent Office (EPO) will accept a broader range of electronic signatures on documents submitted as evidence to support requests under Rules 22 and 85 and under Rules 23 and 24 EPC. In line with the signature requirements in the patent grant process, the EPO will accept handwritten signatures, facsimile signatures, and text string signatures within the meaning of Article 12(2) and (3) of the decision by the President of the European Patent Office dated 3 May 2023 concerning the electronic filing of documents. Documents bearing a facsimile signature or a text string signature may be filed either on paper or electronically using the EPO’s electronic filing services.”

The EPO Notice says it will accept digital signatures that use Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) technology, including advanced and qualified electronic signatures within the meaning of the EU’s eIDAS Regulation.  It will also accept digital signatures that do not use PKI technology provided that:

  • the documents in question are filed electronically;
  • are legible; and
  • are not infected with a computer virus and do not contain other malicious software.

The EPO says it will not examine the authenticity of the signature applied to a document. However, where any doubts over its authenticity arise, the EPO will require clarification and may request further evidence.

Entitlement to sign

A further simplification of EPO practice concerns examination of an individual’s entitlement to sign on behalf of a legal person in respect of registration of assignments and licences.  Where a person is entitled to sign by virtue of their position within the legal person, this position needs to be expressly indicated.  However, the entitlement will no longer be checked by the EPO.  Best practice is sill to confirm the individual signing has authority to sign and then include the specific role/position of that person in the signature block of the assignment/licence that is to be recorded at the EPO.

It should be noted that these rule changes are only applicable to the recordal of transactions at the EPO and a successful recordal does not necessarily mean that the underlying assignment or license is valid. For example, it’s still imperative that a signatory has the appropriate authority to sign on behalf of a relevant party and whether or not an electronic signature is sufficient to provide a binding contract will depend on the laws governing the contract at the time.

If you would like further advice on this change in EPO practice, please speak to your usual attorney.

Latest updates

Empowered, Not Replaced: The Risks and Rewards of Using AI Tools in Patent Prosecution

With the rapid rise of AI and extreme hype around generative AI tools in the workplace, patent firms around the world have had to seriously consider to what extent they …

Read article

EU Agrees on NGT Plant Regulation: What It Means for Patents and Licensing

The European Parliament and Council have reached a provisional agreement for plants developed using New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) – below we summarise the main points and set out the requirements …

Read article

When Retail Branding Meets Politics

(Inter IKEA Systems v Algemeen Vlaams Belang (Case C‑298/23) In November 2022, the Flemish political party Vlaams Belang presented its “IKEA-PLAN – Immigratie Kan Echt Anders” (“Immigration Really Can Be Different”). …

Read article

Office Closed Dates December 2025 / January 2026

HGF Office Closed Dates December 2025 / January 2026   UK Thursday 25 and Friday 26 December 2025 CLOSED Thursday 1 January 2026* CLOSED * Friday 2 January 2026 – …

Read article

Often Copied, Never Equaled: When Do Everyday Items Become Subject of Copyright?

The  borderline between ‘pure’ works of art and mere utilitarian objects” –  Can iconic, yet everyday products be protected under copyright? The above question was posed by Advocate General in …

Read article

T 0883/23: Dosage claims and their entitlement to priority when only the clinical trial protocol was disclosed in the priority application

In a recently issued decision by the EPO’s Board of Appeal (BoA), the BoA held that claims directed to a combination of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) at particular doses were …

Read article

The end of the Brexit overhang for trade marks: review, refile and revoke.

On the 31st December 2025, five years will have passed since the end of the Brexit transitional period on 31st December 2020. Why is this relevant? For UK cloned trade …

Read article
Event - 14th January 2026

Seminar on The aftermath of G1/24 - has anything changed?

HGF is hosting a The aftermath of G1/24 – has anything changed? Which will be followed by networking, apero, and snacks. The Seminar will be held on Wednesday, 14th January …

Event details