EU Commission Publishes Final Report On Competition Inqui...

'[...] Promotion of innovation and driving economic growth are common goals of industrial property law and competition law. Innovation constitutes an essential and dynamic component of an open and competitive market economy. Intellectual property rights promote dynamic competition by encouraging undertakings to invest in developing new or improved products and processes. So does competition by putting pressure on undertakings to innovate. Therefore, both intellectual property rights and competition are necessary to promote innovation and ensure a competitive exploitation thereof. If the existence and exercise of an industrial property right are not of themselves incompatible with competition law, they are not immune from competition law intervention. However, certain practices can only be an infringement in exceptional circumstances

[...]

With regard to competition between originator companies in particular, defensive patenting strategies that mainly focus on excluding competitors without pursuing innovative efforts and/or the refusal to grant a license on unused patents will remain under scrutiny in particular in situations where innovation was effectively blocked.

As regards competition between originator companies and generic companies, delays to generic market entry are a particular point of concern. The possible use of specific instruments by originator companies in order to delay generic entry will be subject to competition scrutiny if used in an anti-competitive way, which may constitute an infringement under Article 81 or 82 of the EC Treaty. In the case of clear indications that a submission by a stakeholder intervening before a marketing authorisation body was primarily made to delay the market entry of a competitor/applicant, injured parties and stakeholders are invited to bring relevant evidence of practices to the attention of the relevant competition authorities.

[...]

All stakeholders expressed strong support for the urgent creation of a single Community patent and a unified and specialised patent litigation system in Europe which are currently under discussion. Rulings by the unified litigation system should be swift, of high quality and cost-effective. The results of the inquiry confirm that the Community patent and unified litigation system would create significant cost and efficiency improvements, in particular by reducing the costs associated with multiple filings, by eliminating essentially parallel court cases between the same parties in different Member States and by enhancing legal certainty through the avoidance of conflicting rulings. The Commission continues to make all efforts leading to the rapid adoption of these instruments.

Stakeholders agree on the importance that European - and in the future Community - patents granted by the EPO should respond to a high quality standard. Strong support was further received by all stakeholders that the EPO should be enabled to accelerate procedures whenever possible. Based on its findings of the sector inquiry, the Commission supports the recent initiatives by the EPO to "raise the bar". In this respect the Commission welcomes the recent decision to limit the time period during which the voluntary divisional patent applications can be filed. The Commission also supports the EPO in its efforts to shorten the opposition and appeal procedures.'

Ok, all this sounds a bit like some sabre rattling with potential actions plotted to play out competition law against patent law. EU Community Patent and UPLS - buth not yet revolutionary proposals, as well as 'raising the bar'.