UPC_CoA_364/2024

Order of the President of the Court of Appeal on a petition for review of the Registrar's decision refusing registration of an applicant in the list of UPC representatives. The applicant (anonymized) argued he met the requirements of Art. 48(2) UPCA as a European patent attorney and German patent attorney (Patentanwalt). The dispute centred on whether his training in the 1997-1998 'Munich Year' (Münchner Jahr) was equivalent to the 'Law for Patent Attorneys' course at FernUniversität Hagen required under the transitional provisions of the EPLC Rules. The President of the Court of Appeal reviewed the Registrar's two refusal decisions.

The President of the Court of Appeal dismissed the petition for review of the Registrar's decision refusing to enter the applicant (anonymised) on the list of UPC representatives under Art. 48(2) UPCA. The applicant held a DPMA 'Patentassessor' qualification and claimed his 'Munich Year' training was equivalent to the FernUniversität Hagen 'Law for Patent Attorneys' course listed in Rule 12.1(a)(ii) EPLC Rules. The President found no evidence that the curriculum and examination requirements were identical, and rejected the equivalence argument.