Talk:Intellectual Property Enterprise Court

Court's scope?

In the initial version of the article, I wrote:

The PCC also hears cases involving other forms of intellectual property, although these can be taken to a broader range of courts.

I believe this was the case even before the 2005 order. Am I right in thinking that, as well as the patent and registered design cases that were reserved to the PCC and the Patents Court of the High Court, the PCC could also hear other IP cases in a more general underlying capacity, simply as a designated Chancery court?

Can anyone confirm or deny this? Could, say, a copyright case still be brought to the PCC in this capacity? -- Jheald 12:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Copyright is a matter where many different courts could be competent and the PCC would certainly be appropriate for some cases. I'd been thinking in terms of the special competence of the PCC, which needed to be conferred because patents, designs, etc. are otherwise specifically reserved to the High Court. I think it would be correct to add back something with the sense of your original text, to indicate that the indicated matters are in addition to the competence of any normal county court. I think I'd want to look at the Civil Procedure Rules Part 63 and the relevant practice direction before saying anything too specific though. Tim B 14:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

The jurisdiction of the Patents County Court is set by s287(1)(a) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 read in conjunction with the Patents County Court (Designation and Jurisdiction) Order 1994. The jurisdiction is limited to 'patent and design matters', but excludes appeals from the Comptroller. I believe however that the text in the main article is correct insofar as copyright matters and trade mark matters may be heard by any county court, provided the other limitations applicable to their jurisdiction are met. Peerwat (talk) 12:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Updated information / citations for PCC Wiki

PCC wiki entry page update

Suggested revised version for the PCC wiki entry with citations/references and the latest factual updates/amends.

May I propose the below as the revised/new version for this wiki entry?

User:Navarram1 15:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Patents County Court

In the legal system of Courts of England and Wales, the Patents County Court (PCC) in London is an alternative venue to the Patents Court of the High Court for bringing legal cases involving certain matters concerning patents, registered designs and, more recently, trade marks, including Community trade marks and designs[1] where the courts of England and Wales are competent, as well as other intellectual property cases where a normal certain county courts may be competent (such as for many copyright matters).

Established in 1990 by an order made under Section 287 (1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988[2], (CDPA) the intention was that the PCC should be a forum where simpler cases could be dealt with under a cheaper and more streamlined procedure than the High Court. However, in 1996 the Woolf reforms removed the procedural distinctions between the County Court Rules and those governing patent cases in the High Court. This left little scope for using the enhanced case management powers under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) to reduce costs. In practice, following the Woolf Reforms of 1998, the streamlined procedure is now available in all courts.

One remaining difference however is that cases at the PCC can be argued by solicitors or patent agents, rather than having to be presented by separate qualified barristers (though a patent agent also has right of audience in the Patents Court in appeals from the Patent Office; a patent agent holding a Litigator Certificate has right of audience in any case before the Patents Court and in the court of appeal in appeals from the Patents Court[3]).

Formally, the PCC has the status of a county court; however there is no restriction on the complexity of cases it can hear, nor the levels of damages and costs it can award. Cases can be transferred from the PCC list to be heard by the High Court at the discretion of the PCC[4]; the High Court also routinely transfers cases from its list to the PCC. As with the High Court, appeals from PCC decisions (if leave to appeal is granted) are heard by the Court of Appeal[5].

In January 2010 Lord Justice Jackson’s published the Final Report from his Review of Civil Litigation Costs. He had been asked by the then Attorney General to make its final report recommendations to improve on access to justice at proportionate cost. This endorsed the proposals for reform of the PCC from the Intellectual Property Court Users Committee (IPCUC) as the means by which to achieve this in relation to IP disputes.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) implemented the first of the proposals in relation to court procedures and the costs regime through amendments to the CPR on 1 October 2010. The streamlined procedures include new rules on the process and timings of filing claims, defence, counterclaims etc. and introducing a maximum duration of two days for the main hearing came into force. This is coupled with a new recoverable costs scale which stipulates maximum charges for each stage of the process to a limit of £50,000 (excluding interest). Jackson LJ also recommended introducing a limit on the value of claims heard in the PCC, implementing for the first time the power in CDPA section 288(1).

The court reforms coincided with the appointmented to the PCC of a new Judge, Colin Birss QC. Colin Ian Birss (born 28th December 1964), styled His Honour Judge Birss QC, is a Specialist Circuit Judge and Chairman of the Copyright Tribunal. He is the judge of the Patents County Court in England and Wales. He was appointed on 5th October 2010.

Judge Colin Birss QC combines this position with this role with that of Chairman of the Copyright Tribunal. His predecessor, appointed in the Since Autumn of 2001, was Judge Michael Fysh QC. Cases are heard by the judge or an appointed deputy judge.

References

1. The Community Trade Mark (Designation of Community Trade Mark Courts) Regulations 2005 SI No. 440 and The Community Designs (Designation of Community Design Courts) Regulations 2005 SI No. 696.

2. The Patents County Court (Designation and Jurisdiction) Order 1990 SI No. 1496. This was subsequently revoked and replaced by The Patents County Court (Designation and Jurisdiction) Order 1994 SI No. 1609, which has in turn been amended by The High Court and County Courts Jurisdiction (Amendment) Order 2005 SI No. 587

3. The Chartered Institute of Patent Agents Order 1999 SI No. 3137, made under Section 29(2) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.

4. Section 289(1), Patents Act 1977

5. Civil Procedure Rules Practice Direction 52, paragraph 2A.2(2)

External links

• The Patents County Court (Judiciary of England and Wales) http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/county-court/patents-county-court

• The Work of the Patents County Court by Judge Michael Fysh QC, (Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre (OIPRC) Working Paper Series No 3, February 2003)

• UK Patents County Court - Phoenix Risen? by Michael Burdon, partner at Olswang solicitors, (Patent World, July/August 2003)

• Alk-Abello Limited and Meridian Medical Technologies Dey Pharma: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWPCC/2010/14.html

• The Copyright Tribunal: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ctribunal.htm

• Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents_County_Court"

Categories: Court systems in England and Wales | United Kingdom patent law

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Intellectual Property Enterprise Court. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060221102135/http://www.oiprc.ox.ac.uk/EJWP0303.pdf to http://www.oiprc.ox.ac.uk/EJWP0303.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)