ZARZALEJOS SAYS SUPPLEMENTARY PROTECTION CERTIFICATE IS ESSENTIAL FOR EUROPEAN INDUSTRY AND CALLS FOR GOING FURTHER
The PP MEP Javier Zarzalejos, said last February 28 that the Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) is essential for European industry, as extending the duration of patents encourages and promotes innovation.
He did so in the debate on the European Parliament’s proposal on the reform package proposed by the European Commission for the regulation of SPCs, of which he has been a negotiator on behalf of the European People’s Party parliamentary group.
A supplementary protection certificate is an industrial property right that extends the duration of a patent (up to five years) for a medicinal product for human or veterinary use, or a phytosanitary product, that has been authorized by the regulatory authorities. They seek to compensate for the loss of patent protection due to the lengthy testing and trials required to obtain a marketing authorization.
“So far, PPP protection is only available at the national level, making it a fragmented system with complex and costly procedures and causing legal uncertainty. The new measures, essentially procedural and focused on reducing times and costs, are beneficial for the sector and are reflected in four legislative texts,” Zarzalejos explained.
All this is in line with the policies promoted by the EPP, however, Zarzalejos wants the proposal to go further, to avoid further lengthening the procedures to which medicines and phytosanitary products are subjected, so he hopes that his proposals in this regard will go ahead in the Plenary vote.
These proposals of the EPP group, led by Zarzalejos, seek to reduce costs and administrative burden and improve legal certainty and transparency.
Two measures to avoid duplication and unnecessary burdens
On the one hand, the EPP Group considers the new opposition procedure proposed by the Commission to be “unnecessary”, since there are sufficient guarantees for interested third parties to intervene in the different stages of the procedure, which in practice will lead to a delay in the proceedings.
On the other hand, the group proposes that invalidity actions be brought directly before the Unified Patent Court, in order to avoid the unnecessary delays and costs involved in a review of the decision by the EU Intellectual Property Office itself.
“We believe that these two measures help to streamline the processes, avoid duplication and unnecessary burdens,” he concluded.