Art. 87 – Revision
Section: PART V
Category: FINAL PROVISIONS
Content
1. Either seven years after the entry into force of this Agreement or once 2 000 infringement cases have been decided by the Court, whichever is the later point in time, and if necessary at regular intervals thereafter, a broad consultation with the users of the patent system shall be carried out by the Administrative Committee on the functioning, efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the Court and on the trust and confidence of users of the patent system in the quality of the Court's decisions. On the basis of this consultation and an opinion of the Court, the Administrative Committee may decide to revise this Agreement with a view to improving the functioning of the Court.
2. The Administrative Committee may amend this Agreement to bring it into line with an international treaty relating to patents or Union law.
3. A decision of the Administrative Committee taken on the basis of paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not take effect if a Contracting Member State declares within twelve months of the date of the decision, on the basis of its relevant internal decision-making procedures, that it does not wish to be bound by the decision. In this case, a Review Conference of the Contracting Member States shall be convened.
Related Topics
- revision
- administrative committee
- review conference
Related Cases
- UPC_CFI_628/2024 – Emboline v AorticLab
- UPC CFI 712/2025 – F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Roche Diabetes Care GmbH v A.Menarini Diagnostics S.r.l., BERLIN-CHEMIE AG and A.Menarini Diagnostics France SASU
- UPC CFI 628/2025 – Bodycap, National Center for Scientific Research - CNRS, University of Rennes v EPO
- UPC CFI 365/2023 – FUJIFILM Corporation v Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH
- UPC CFI 239/2023 – Plant-e v Bioo
- UPC CFI 255/2023 – Meril Italy Srl, Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd v Edwards Lifesciences Corporation
- UPC_CFI_1/2023 – Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Groupe, Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A. v Amgen, Inc.