Download Commission and Council positions signal end of plant

1
Commission and Council positions signal
end of plant-related patents
The patentability of plant varieties has been a recurring topic of discussion over
the years. Despite some pro-patentability decisions by the European Patent
Office, the European Commission recently set out its restrictive views on this
subject in a Notice. This led to the European Council stating its Conclusions on
the Notice in February 2017. The outcome is clear: both EU bodies conclude that
no patents should be allowed for plant products obtained through essentially
biological processes, for example genetically modified plants.
While breeders are constantly looking for new plant varieties, such as pesticide-resistant
plants, the legal protection of those new varieties is a regular topic of debate. These
debates are at the core of patent protection: supporting innovation but at the same time
limiting access to the patented subject matter.
What does the legal framework say?
Under the EU Biotech Directive and the European Patent Convention (EPC), plant varieties
and essentially biological processes for the production of plants are not patentable. Plant
varieties can be protected by “plant variety rights”, which grant exclusivity to the right
holder while leaving room for others to use the protected material as a starting point for
further breeding (the breeders’ exemption).
The EPC is a non-EU convention and the Biotech Directive was implemented in the EPC by
the EPC Implementing Regulations. Those Regulations also provide that the examining and
opposition divisions of the European Patent Organisation (EPO) use the Directive as a
supplementary means of interpretation when examining European patents and patent
applications for EPC compliance. In addition, the EPO Guidelines provide that judgments of
the Court of Justice of the European Union on the interpretation of the Directive may be
“considered as being persuasive”.
Limited patentability
In its Broccoli I and Tomato I and Broccoli II and Tomato II decisions about breeding
methods, the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal gave its interpretation of the relevant
provisions on exclusion of patentability and left the door open for certain plant-related
patents: patents on breeding processes which include an additional step of a technical
nature, and patents on products derived from using essentially biological processes
(product-by-process). The decisions led to much commotion and speculation, as they
favoured large agrochemical companies, but put the smaller breeding industry and
consumers at a disadvantage.
Commission and Council view
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
-1/3-
13.03.2017
2
In December 2015, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the European
Commission to clarify the scope and interpretation of the Biotech Directive, as the Broccoli
and Tomato decisions could lead to more plant-related patents. Following the May 2016 EU
Symposium in the Netherlands, the Commission issued a Notice on certain articles of the
Biotech Directive in November 2016. In this Notice, the Commission indicated that the EU
legislators’ intention was to exclude from patentability products (plants/animals and
plant/animal parts) that are obtained by means of essentially biological processes.
More recently, in February 2017, the European Council decided to publish the Notice, as
well as its own Conclusions that the Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decisions are in conflict
with the legal provisions of certain EU Member States. The Council urged EU member
states, in their capacity as EPO members, to advocate for the EPO’s practice to be aligned
with these conclusions.
Impact
The clarification at the EU level is welcome news for plant breeders: the end of patent
protection for plant varieties seems near. This means that they will have access to plant
materials to breed new plant varieties. Supporters of this new direction refer to its positive
effect on food diversity and global food security. Meanwhile, companies owning plantrelated patents, mainly large agrochemical companies, will probably not be cheering, as the
development of plant varieties is a time consuming and difficult process. According to an
expert group report referred to in the Council’s Conclusions, the development of one single
new variety is a complicated process and can easily take 12 to 15 years.
As to actual impact, the Commission’s Notice and the Council’s Conclusions are not legally
binding on the Court of Justice of the EU and the EPO. Ultimately, it is up to the Court of
Justice to interpret the Biotech Directive and up to the EPO and national courts to decide on
patentability matters. At the same time, there are already calls for the text of the Biotech
Directive to be amended to incorporate the interpretative guidelines given by the
Commission and the Council.
Still, the EPO has already responded to the signals coming out of the EU by deciding that, in
view of the potential impact of the Commission’s Notice, all proceedings that entirely
revolve around the patentability of a plant (or animal) obtained by an essentially biological
process will be automatically suspended. In December 2016, the EPO indicated that it
would follow its member states’ interpretation on this matter of patentability. It is unclear
for how long pending proceedings will be suspended. As the majority of EPO member states
are also EU members, this new EU direction is very likely to be implemented in the EPO
practice and, as a consequence, existing plant patents will not survive. New patents of this
type will no longer be granted either.
In addition to EPO practice, national courts will also have to decide how to deal with
national proceedings and existing patents. For some countries (including the Netherlands,
Germany and France) the new signals do not affect national patent laws, as these laws
already explicitly exclude patents on plants or parts of plants that are derived from
essentially biological processes. For those countries, the question of how to interpret their
national laws remains, as these should be in line with EU law, including the Biotech
Directive and its interpretation.
In the end, the Court of Justice of the EU will need to answer these questions in order to end
the existing legal uncertainty on plant-related patents.
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
-2/3-
13.03.2017
3
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
-3/3-
13.03.2017