21.2.2017

The Unified Patent System – Where Do We Stand Now?

Lately, there has been a lot of discussion around the UPC and European patents with unitary effect. But what is the UPC and what does it mean in practice? What are European patents with unitary effect and how do they differentiate from the traditional European patents?

Towards an Enhanced European Patent System

First of all, the UPC relates to the European-wide patent reform. The UPC, which is an abbreviation for the Unified Patent Court, is a planned single patent court covering 25 EU member states. If established, the UPC would be a common court to all member states contracting to the Unified Patent Court Agreement.

The purpose is that the UPC would have exclusive jurisdiction over both future European patents with unitary effect, European patents validated in one or more EU member state which is a party to the Unified Patent Court Agreement, supplementary protection certificates issued for a product covered by such a patent and European patent applications − the jurisdiction, however, being subject to certain exceptions during the transitional period. The UPC’s rulings would have effect in those contracting member states that have ratified the Unified Patent Court Agreement. The UPC would not have any jurisdiction over national patents or supplementary protection certificates granted for a national patent. After the reform, the Finnish Market Court would still have jurisdiction over Finnish national patents and supplementary protection certificates granted for a Finnish patent.

The European patent with unitary effect − the unitary patent − would be a new, supranational option to have patent protection in Europe. At the moment a European patent needs to be validated in each contracting state where patent protection is desired. This means in practice that a patent holder has a bundle of national patents. A unitary patent would only consist of a one single patent providing patent protection in the member states who are participating in the enhanced cooperation procedure.

After the reform, unitary patents and traditional European patents will be granted by European Patent Office (EPO). The pre-grant phase at the EPO is not subject to change. When the EPO has granted a European patent, the patent holder can file a request for unitary effect, i.e., a uniform patent protection in the participating member states.    

When Will All This Happen?

To date, the implementation of the unified patent system is still ongoing. In order for the entire system to come into force, the Unified Patent Court Agreement must be ratified by at least thirteen EU member states (including the high-profile patent countries: the UK, France and Germany). At the moment, the following member states have ratified the agreement: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. Last autumn, the UK government confirmed it is continuing with preparations for ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement despite Brexit.

According to the latest information, the UPC Preparatory Committee, which is an entity responsible for establishment of the UPC, is currently working under the assumption that the Provisional Application Phase (PAP) will start this spring, most likely in May 2017. In practice, the PAP means that the UPC organisation will be established.

The assumption is that the Unified Patent Court Agreement will enter into force and the UPC will become operational in December of this year. Before the UPC becomes operational, the patent holders or applicants have the possibility to opt out their already-existing European patents or patent applications from the new UPC system for the whole life-time of that patent. This sunrise period for opting out patents will be a minimum of 3 months. The current plan is that the opt-out period will start in September 2017. As the sunrise period is somewhat short, it is worth making some contingency plans in this regard and considering implementing the opt-out (if so desired) already in the beginning of the sunrise period in order have sufficient time to deal with any possible queries or difficulties in the opt-out registration procedure.

Latest references

We advised Efima Oyj on the sale of its AI business to Better Care Technologies Oy. The transaction included Efima’s Moiva AI platform developed for the care sector, the related technology and brand, customer contracts, and the experts working in the business. Efima is a Finnish digital company that supports the sustainable growth of large and mid-sized companies by streamlining their business processes and by creating competitive advantage through the innovative use of artificial intelligence and data. The company has nearly 200 experts based in Helsinki and Tampere. 
Case published 21.9.2026
We advised Neoen Renewables Finland Oy, part of the French Neoen Group, in its sale of a data centre project to a consortium consisting of international data centre developers and operators. This marked Neoen’s first data centre development project in Finland. Founded in 2008, Neoen is one of the world’s leading independent renewable energy producers. The company operates in 15 countries. It develops, finances, builds, owns, and operates solar power plants, wind farms, and battery storage systems. Neoen Group is owned by global alternative asset manager Brookfield Corporation.
Case published 17.9.2026
We advised Jolt Capital and Tesi in connection with their investment in VEV, a leading provider of commercial fleet electrification solutions. The investment, led by Jolt Capital with Tesi as co-investor, will support VEV’s next phase of growth and expansion across Europe. As part of the transaction, VEV became an independent company following the acquisition of Vitol’s stake in the business. Founded by Vitol, VEV provides integrated fleet electrification solutions combining fleet strategy, charging infrastructure, energy supply and operational services. Through its VEV IQ platform, the company supports more than 6,000 commercial electric vehicles across Europe and has been deployed across more than 600 sites spanning the transport, logistics and waste sectors. Jolt Capital is a private equity firm focused on growth investments in European deeptech companies. Tesi is a Finnish state-owned investment company that promotes Finnish business and economic growth through investments. We advised Jolt Capital and Tesi on the equity financing and structuring aspects of the transaction. International law firm Goodwin advised the investors on the acquisition of VEV.
Case published 10.9.2026
VR-Group Plc is a transport and logistics group owned by the Finnish State, operating passenger and freight rail transport in Finland with activities also in the Swedish market. VR Group provides passenger, logistics and maintenance services with over 160 years’ experience in developing responsible transport of the future. We advise VR Group in intellectual property matters as part of the company’s wider brand protection efforts. Our assignments have included advice on copyright, design rights and trademarks, focusing on the protection of the company’s visual identity – including its distinctive green colour – in connection with transport services as part of a comprehensive IP protection strategy. VR Group’s consistent brand building has also received recognition, including the Finland Chamber of Commerce’s Brand of the Year award in 2026. In the competition, brands were viewed comprehensively from various perspectives, including their story, strategic role, brand renewal ability and intellectual property protection. The jury found that VR had understood the importance of the protection of its brand as part of a comprehensive business strategy. 
Case published 9.9.2026