< Back to latest news & events

News

Why the EPO’s top-up search for earlier national rights matters for the UP and UPC

January 2023

Before unitary effect can be registered by the EPO, an applicant must first obtain a European patent via the EPO as it does in the current way. In order to be eligible for registration as a Unitary Patent (“UP”), the European patent must have been granted with the same set of claims in respect of all the 25 participating Member States. This condition must be met irrespective of whether all these states will in fact be covered by the UP. This means that (i) withdrawing the designation of any of the 25 participating Member States rules out obtaining a UP and (ii) having a different set of claims for any of the participating Member States, would also prevent the EPO from registering a UP.

Earlier national rights (i.e. patent documents from the EPC contracting states that would potentially present a “novelty only” patentability problem) are not included in the state of the art for the purposes of the EPO’s examination for patentability (Article 54(3) EPC). This refers to national applications of which the filing dates are prior to the filing or priority date of the European application and which were published as national applications or patents on or after that date. However, under Article 139(2) EPC, after the European patent has been granted, earlier national rights can be invoked as a ground for revocation in national proceedings.

From 1 September 2022, the EPO has been carrying out systematic top-up searches to find such earlier national rights – this is usually reported as part of the EPO’s R71(3) communication (notice of intention to grant). The EPO already carries out a top-up search for European rights at the end of examination.

When it opens, the UPC may revoke a UP, either entirely or partly (Article 65 UPCA), only on the grounds referred to in Articles 138(1) and 139(2) of the EPC. As such, an earlier national right could become prior art against a UP before the UPC.

To avoid these earlier national rights, applicants can file separate sets of claims for countries in which earlier national rights are found (Rule 138 EPC). However, doing so would rule out a UP.

Applicants may therefore need to consider the finding of a national prior right carefully, as it will play into the decision on their validation strategy and whether a UP is the right approach.


This article was prepared by HGF Partners & Patent Attorneys Andy Camenisch and Dr Jennifer Uno

Latest updates

HGF Ranked #1 in the UK for Trade Mark Portfolios in the 2025 Trade Mark Filing Trends Report by Clarivate.

HGF has achieved the #1 ranking for the UK for trade mark portfolios in the newly released 2025 Trade mark Filing Trends report by Clarivate, recognising the firm as a …

Read article

The EPO Board of Appeal comments on the scope of the morality exclusion from patentability

The recent decision, T1553/22 of the Board of Appeal required the Board to consider the scope of the exclusions from patentability under Article 53(a) EPC. The invention in this case …

Read article

The Enlarged Board of Appeal has today issued its decision in seminal case G1/24.

G1/24, described as one of the most important cases in decades, relates to how claims of patents are to be interpreted by the Boards of Appeal and, by extension, all …

Read article

UPC’s Hamburg Local Division provides guidance on the extent to which a patent may be used as its own “lexicon”

Agfa NV v Gucci & Anors. [UPC_CFI_278/2023] – Hamburg Local Division of the UPC (Klepsch, Schilling, Sarlin) – 30 April 2025 While we await a decision on G1/24 from the …

Read article

MevoCem Nominated for the Earthshot Prize by CIPA

We’re delighted to share that our client, Material Evolution, has been nominated by the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) for the globally renowned Earthshot Prize, in recognition of their …

Read article

Agritech Thymes: Agritech 2030: Forecasting the Technologies Poised to Transform Farming

Whilst yet to recover to the levels of 2011-2021, where capital invested in agritech increased 20-fold, investor funding in agritech is starting to pick up, and 2025 is set to …

Read article

UPC delivers first judgment on Validity and Infringement of a Second Medical Use Claim

Sanofi Biotechnology SAS & Anor v Amgen, Inc., & Ors– Thomas, Thom, Kupecz and Dorland-Galliot – [UPC_CFI_505/2024] The Dusseldorf Local Division (LD) has delivered the UPC’s first Judgment on second …

Read article