whereas on 4 December 2009 the Council adopted conclusions on the main features of the future patent system based on two pillars: (i) the creation of a unified patent litigation system, and (ii) the creation of an EU patent – a legal instrument for granting patents valid across the EU as a whole; whereas the Council considered that those conclusions should form part of the overall final agreement on a package of measures for an Enhanced Patent System in Europe comprising the creation of a European and EU Patents Court (EEUPC), an EU patent, including the separate regulation on the translation arrangements, an Enhanced Partnership betwee ...[+++]n the European Patent Office and central industrial property offices of Member States and, to the extent necessary, amendments to the European Patent Convention,

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 European patents in individual Member Stat ...[+++]es, 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 States and would eliminate the costs and complexity for those territories, thus fostering scientific and technological advances and the functioning of the internal market,

whereas the requirements of Articles 326 to 334 TFEU are also satisfied; whereas enhanced cooperation will facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market by eliminating obstacles to the 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,

e) Support the establishment of a NN Patent Monitoring System e.g. by the European Patent Office (EPO) as well as the harmonisation of practices in the processing of NN patent applications between patent offices such as the EPO, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and Japan Patent Office (JPO).

(4) Community patent law applicable to the Community patent should not replace the laws of the Member States on patents, nor European patent law as established by the Munich Convention. It would not in fact appear to be justified to require undertakings to apply for registration of their patents as Community patents, since national patents and European patents continue to be necessary for those undertakings which do not want protection of their inventions at Community level. This Regulation should therefore be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to grant national patents.

2. On request, the Commission may grant a compulsory licence in respect of a first patent to the proprietor of a national or Community patent or to the proprietor of a plant variety right who cannot use his patent (second patent) or his national or Community plant variety right without infringing a Community patent (first patent), provided that the invention or new plant variety claimed in the second patent or plant variety right involves an important technical advance of considerable economic significance in relation to the invention claimed in the first patent.