BETA

Activities of Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE related to 2010/0384(NLE)

Legal basis opinions (0)

Amendments (15)

Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation -1 (new)
- having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent (COM(2010)0350) and its impact assessment,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009 brought about a change of the legal basis for the creation of the EU patent by introducing Article 118 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU"), according to which: “In the context of the establishment and functioning of the internal market, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall establish measures for the creation of European intellectual property rights to provide uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the Union and for the setting up of centralised Union-wide authorisation, coordination and supervision arrangements.”
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas despite considerable efforts and several rounds of negotiations undertaken by the Council in 2010, it was confirmed at the Competitiveness Council meeting on 10 December 2010 that insurmountable difficulties existedit was not possible to makinge a decision on the translation arrangements requiring unanimity impossible now and in the foreseeable future and that the objec; whereas there exists different alternatives tof the proposed Regulations to establish unitary patent protection in the entire European Union could not be attained within a reasonable period by applying the relevant provisions of the Treatiestranslations arrangements –such as OHIM-like system, English only or English always-, that has never been discussed or even taken into consideration; whereas all these facts could lead to the conclusion that the proposed enhanced cooperation is not the last resort, as stated in article 20 TEU,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)
Na. whereas the Commission has not assessed the impact of its proposal on enhanced cooperation,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas Parliament has verified non- compliance with Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union ("TEU") and Articles 326 to 334 TFEU,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
R. whereas, in particular, this enhanced cooperation may be regarded as furthering the Union's objectives, protecting its interests and reinforcing its integration process within the meaning of Article 20 TEU, in the light of the Commission's impact assessment in connection with its above-mentioned 2010 proposal for a regulation on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent, which pointed to the lack of a unitary patent providing protection across the entire EU leading to a fragmented patent system; whereas this fragmentation is caused by the high costs and complexity of validating notwithstanding the previous paragraph, the creation of a unitary patent protection extends to exclusive competence of the Union, as it will be necessary to adopt two International Agreements: The adhesion of the Union to the European Patent Convention (EPC), in order for the European pPatents in individual Member States which can amount to 40% of the overall costs of patenting in Europe; whereas the creation of unitary patent protection for a group of Member States would improve the level of patent protection by making it possible to obtain uniform patent protection throughout the territories of the participating Member St Office to be entitled to grant EU patents; The Agreement on the European and EU Patents Court, to be negotiatesd and would eliminate the costs and complexity for those territories, thus fostering scientific and technological advances and the functioning of the internal market,signed by the Union, its Member States and third parties.
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
S. whereas it is clearly apparent from the antecedents of this initiative that the proposed decision is not being put forward as a last resort and that the objectives of the cooperation cannot be attained within a reasonable period by the Union as a whole; whereas at least nine Member States intend to participate in it; whereas, therefore, the requirements of Article 20 TEU are satisfi, since alternative translation arrangements have not been seriously nor deeply discussed,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
T. whereas the requirements of Articles 20, 326 to 334 TFEU are also satisfiednot satisfied, as the proposed enhanced cooperation undermines the internal market and the economic cohesion of the EU, is a discrimination to trade between Member States, distorts competition and does not respect the linguistic diversity of the EU; whereas there is also noncompliance with the requirements of Article 118 TFEU, since the enhanced cooperation does not provide uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the EU,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
U. whereas, in particular, enhanced cooperation in this area does not compliesy with the Treaties and Union law - Article 326 TFEU - since it will not affect the acquis, gieven thatif, to date, only a limited number of legal acts of the Union within the meaning of Article 288 TFEU have been adopted, none of them covering the creation of a European intellectual property right providing for uniform protection throughout the Union; whereas, with the exception ofould be affected such as the Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, no approximation of substantive patent law exists at Union level, and whereasthe Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products and Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products concern patent term extensions for specific types of patented subject matter; whereas enhanced cooperation in the area of patents would not cause discrimination since access to the unitary patent will be open to users of the patent system from all over the Union,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
V. whereas enhanced cooperation will not undermine the internal market or economic, social and territorial cohesion, will not constitute a barrier to or give rise to discrimination in trade between Member States and will not distort competition between them; whereas, instead, it will facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market by eliminating obstacles to free movement of goods, helping to tackle patent infringements, possibly increasing the number of inventors seeking patent protection throughout the Union, providing equal access to unitary patent protection to all inventors, innovative companies and patent-holders whether they come from participating Member States or non-participating Member States, providing an additional instrument available to all patent-holders in the Union, improving the framework conditions for innovative businesses throughout the Union, and eliminating, among participating Member States, the current fragmentation where patent right "borders" exist between Member States,deleted
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
W. whereas enhanced cooperation will not respect the rights, competences and obligations of the non-participating Member States, inasmuch as the possibility of obtaining unitary patent protection on the territories of the participating Member States does not affect the availability or the conditions of patent protection on the territories of non- participating Member State of third parties - who must respect patents - to receive the patent information in equal conditions, leading thus to an increase in the number of patent infringements,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
X. whereas Article 328(1) TFEU provides that enhanced cooperation is to be open at any time to all Member States that wish to participate,deleted
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Y
Y. whereas Article 333(2) TFEU allows the Council (or, more precisely, those membersthe second paragraph of Article 118 TFEU obliges the Council to consult the Parliament ofn the Council representing the Member States participating in enhanced cooperation) to adopt a decision stipulating that it will act under the ordinary legislative procedure, rather than the special legislative procedure provided for in the second paragraph of Article 118 TFEU, under which Parliament is merely consultedregulation on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent; whereas this consultation has not taken place, yet,
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. CDoes not consents to the proposal for a Council decision;
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Council to adopt a decision pursuant to Article 333(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union stipulating that, when it comes to the proposal for a Council Regulation implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection with respect to language arrangements for the European intellectual property rights pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 118 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, it will act under the ordinary legislative procedure;deleted
2011/01/21
Committee: JURI