Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 24: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation the reasons he has not ratified the Agreement on the Application of Article 65 of the Convention on the Grant of European Patents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [45645/10]

Conor Lenihan (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Article 65 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) provides that any Contracting State may require a translation of the text of a European patent into one of its languages if that language is different from the language in which the patent was granted. The European patent system is expensive. Following grant of the patent, the applicant must file translations of the complete patent in whichever States are designated for protection. The cost of the translations must be borne by the applicant. The translation costs make up a very sizeable portion of the costs of acquiring a European patent and, as a result, the European patent is uncompetitive when compared to the cost of obtaining US and Japanese patents.

At an inter-Governmental conference in 1999 a working party was mandated to examine how the translation costs for European patents into the official languages of the contracting states could be reduced by approximately 50%. This working party produced the London Agreement on the Application of Article 65 of the European Patent Convention, which was adopted in London on 17 October 2000. The London Agreement, which is a voluntary Agreement, provides that Member States of the EPC, who have a language in common with the European Patent Office, as Ireland does, would agree to dispense with requirements in relation to the translation of specifications of patents granted in the other two working languages of the EPO. So far, 15 out of the 38 contracting Member States to the EPC have ratified/acceded to the Agreement.

In 2008, my Department undertook a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) to consider whether Ireland should accede to the London Agreement and it concluded that Ireland should accede to the Agreement. The main advantage of the Agreement for Irish inventors and industry seeking patent protection abroad, is that they would no longer be required to furnish translations to the same extent in those countries party to the agreement.

For Ireland, to accede to the London Agreement it is necessary to amend Sections 119 and 121 of the Patents Act, 1992, to align with the terms of the London Agreement. In this respect, I am pleased to inform the Deputy that the Patents (Amendment) Bill, 2010 will be published in the very near future.