= Preliminary set of provisions for the Rules of Procedure (“Rules”) of the Unified Patent Court =

'''15th draft of 31st May 2013'''

== Status ==
 1. First draft dated 29 May 2009, discussed in expert meetings on 5 June and 19 June 2009 

 2. Second draft (Part 1, Chapter 1) dated 9 July 2009, Working paper from the Commission Services, Council working document 11813/09, discussed in Council Working Party on Intellectual Property (Patents) on 22 July 2009 

 3. Third draft dated 25 September 2009, discussed in expert meeting on 2 October 2009 

 4. Fourth draft dated 16 October 2009, discussed at the 5th European Patent Judges' Forum on 30 and 31 October 2009 

 5. Fifth draft dated 27 January 2012, discussed in expert meeting on 3 February 2012 

 6. Sixth draft dated 22 February 2012, discussed by the Drafting Committee on 25/26 February 2012 

 7. Seventh draft dated 20 March 2012, discussed by the Drafting Committee on 24/25 March 2012 

 8. Eighth draft dated 30 March 2012, for technical consultation 

 9. Ninth draft dated 24 May 2012 

 10. Tenth draft dated 16 October 2012 

 11. Eleventh draft dated 07 November 2012, discussed by Drafting Committee on 09 and 10 November 2012 

 12. Twelfth draft dated 29 November 

 13. Thirteenth draft dated 14 January 2013, renumbered version 

 14. Fourteenth draft dated 31 January 2013, for further informal comment prior to the public consultation 

 15. 15th draft dated 31st May 2013, for public consultation 

== Introductory remarks ==

The present document contains a draft set of provisions for the Rules of the Unified Patent Court 
(hereinafter "UPC" or "Court") and the Statute of the Court (hereinafter “Statute”). 
Basic principles of procedural law are already laid down in Part III of the Agreement on a UPC 
(hereinafter "Agreement"), for instance proportionality and fairness, case management, right to 
be heard, publicity, stages of the proceedings etc. The Agreement also contains general
provisions on languages, parties, representation, means of evidence, experts, and defines the 
powers of the UPC to order provisional measures (in particular preliminary injunctions), to issue 
orders to preserve evidence (saisie-contrefaçon), corrective measures etc. 

However, in several places in the Agreement, references are made to the Rules which shall spell 
out procedural details. This is a tried and tested legal technique: only the basic principles have 
been included in the Agreement, many procedural details being left for secondary legal 
instruments. 

In accordance with Article 41(2) Agreement, the Rules of the UPC shall be adopted by the 
Administrative Committee, on the basis of broad consultations with all stakeholders and 
following an opinion of the European Commission on the compatibility of the Rules with Union 
law. 

The Contracting Member States, having signed the Agreement,have set up a Preparatory 
Committee in charge of preparing the practical arrangements for the early establishment and 
coming into operation of the Court. The Contracting Member States acknowledge the importance 
of appropriate Rules for the Court and of their uniform application, which are vital to guarantee 
that the decisions of the Court are of the highest quality and that proceedings are organised in the 
most efficient and cost effective manner. 
 
A small Drafting Committee of expert judges and lawyers was appointed in 2012 to take this 
work forward. 

The eighth draft prepared by the Drafting Committee was the subject of wide technical 
consultation with professional and industry bodies. A list of respondents who commented on that 
draft is set out below. 

The fourteenth draft was the subject of further technical comment by professional and industry 
bodies. A further list of respondents is set out below. 

The aim of the Drafting Committee remains to assist the Preparatory Committee to complete the 
draft Rules following a formal public consultation.
 
Comments on the eighth draft of the Rules were received from the following. 

||Joachim Feldges||Modiano & Partners||
||BDI||Association des Praticiens Européens des Brevets||
||EGA||Association of Intellectual Property Law Firms in Sweden||
||Marina Tavassi||Intellectual Property Lawyers Association (UK)||
||Gabriella Muscolo||Research in Motion||
||IP – Federation||The Danish Association of the Pharmaceutical Industry||
||Dr. Peter Guntz||Association des Avocats de Proprieté Industrielle||
||ICC – France||Dutch/Belgian Respondents I||
||Confindustria||Dutch/Belgian Respondents II||
||Interpat & EFPIA||European Patent Lawyers Association I||
||CCBE||European Patent Lawyers Association II||
||EPA Expert Group||Licensing Executives Society (Britain & Ireland)||
||Thomas Bopp||epi||
||TEVA||GSMA||
||Watson/Arrow||Confederation of Swedish Enterprise||
||EPI – Preliminary Comments|| ||

Comments on the fourteenth draft were received from the following. 

||D.Musker||Alan Johnson (EPLAW)||
||W.Tilmann||Graham Burnett-Hall (EPLAW)||
||Mathias Brandi-Dohrn (EPLAW)||Jochen Buhling (EPLAW)||
||Christoph Lenz||Cordula Tellmann (EPLAW)||
||P.V. Plesner (EPLAW)||Christian Gassauer (EPLAW)||
||Catherine Mateu (EPLAW)||Nicholas Fox||
||Josef Talas (EPLAW)||Intellect||
||Nokia||Mateu & Tellmann (EPLAW)||
||Tankred Thiem (EPLAW)||Debré & Cattoor (EPLAW)||
||Pauline Debré (EPLAW)||Blumenroder & Talas (EPLAW)||
||IPLA||Nokia II||
||Wouter Pors (EPLAW)||McCombie & Thiem (EPLAW)||
||Steven Cattoor (EPLAW)||  ||