Article 48(2) of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court: What You Need to Know
The Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPC) is a new international treaty that will create a single court system for patent disputes across Europe. The UPC will have jurisdiction over both European and national patents, and will be able to issue rulings that are binding in all participating countries.
One key provision of the UPC is Article 48(2), which sets out the requirements for the submission of evidence in patent cases. This article states that parties may only rely on evidence that has been submitted within a certain time period, and that the court may disregard evidence that has not been timely submitted.
The purpose of this provision is to ensure that parties have a fair and balanced opportunity to present their evidence, and that the court is able to fairly evaluate the evidence presented. By setting clear rules for the submission of evidence, Article 48(2) helps to prevent parties from engaging in procedural gamesmanship or from withholding relevant evidence until a later stage in the trial.
Under Article 48(2), parties must submit their evidence at the same time as they submit their written arguments. If a party wishes to rely on evidence that was not available at the time of submission, they must apply to the court for permission to do so. The court may grant permission if the party can show that the evidence was not available earlier, and that it is relevant and necessary to the case.
Article 48(2) also sets out the consequences of failing to comply with the rules on evidence submission. If a party fails to submit evidence in a timely manner, the court may refuse to admit the evidence or may draw adverse inferences against the party. This means that the court may assume that the evidence would not have been favorable to the party, and may give greater weight to the evidence presented by the opposing party.
In summary, Article 48(2) of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court is an important provision that helps to ensure fair and balanced proceedings in patent cases. By setting clear rules for the submission of evidence, the provision helps to prevent procedural gamesmanship and encourages parties to present their evidence in a timely and effective manner. Patent litigants and their legal advisors should carefully consider the requirements of Article 48(2) as they prepare their cases for trial in the new unified patent court system.