< 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

Mycelium Meets Market Reality: The Quiet Role of IP in Scaling Sustainable Materials

Fungal materials are increasingly used in applications ranging from sustainable packaging and leather alternatives to construction composites, textiles, and biotechnology. These developments are transforming fungi from a niche research subject …

Read article
Event - 24th - 25th November 2025

HGF Partners with 3AF for the P2I2025 Symposium

HGF are pleased to be a partner of P2I2025, the annual symposium organised by the Intellectual Property Commission of the French Aeronautics and Astronautics Association (3AF). The event brings together …

Event details

Retailers liability and AI Applications

The question of whether the user (consumer) or the provider of an AI application is liable for the infringement of intellectual property rights as a result of the use of …

Read article
Event - 11th November 2025

OIS Investor Forum - Jeffries

HGF is proud to be sponsoring the OIS Investor Forum on 18th November. One of the premier gatherings for leaders, innovators, and investors across the healthcare industry. The forum covers …

Event details

From Stripes to Supermarkets: The Court of Appeal Reaffirms the Need for Precision in Trade Mark Law

On 23 October 2025, Lord Justice Arnold delivered two landmark Court of Appeal decisions addressing trade mark registrability: Thom Browne Inc & Anor v adidas AG [2025] EWCA Civ 1340 …

Read article

Protecting Digital Health innovation in the AI revolution

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to transform healthcare, from diagnostic imaging and drug discovery to wearable devices and clinical decision support, questions around how to protect these advancements have become …

Read article

Doubling Up on Added Matter at the UPC

Following the UPC Court of Appeal (CoA) decision in Abbott v Sibio (APL_39664/2024, 14 February 2025) we now have a second CoA decision on added matter in expert Klein v …

Read article
Event - 4th November 2025

HGF are Silver Sponsors of LSPN Europe 2025

HGF is proud to be a Silver Sponsor of LSPN Europe 2025, a leading forum dedicated to helping life sciences innovators protect and leverage their intellectual property across the entire …

Event details