Here we go again
When the German legislature first passed a law ratifying the UPC Agreement (UPCA), an individual patent practitioner filed a constitutional complaint. In February 2020, he succeeded in having the law nullified on constitutional grounds. That did not deter the government from pushing ahead. It added language to the explanatory comments and sent the bill back to parliament. This time, it passed the lower and upper chambers with the necessary two-thirds majorities.
Several opponents filed constitutional complaints against that second law ratifying the UPCA. In addition, they asked the Constitutional Court to grant preliminary relief. In accordance with constitutional customs, the German president put his pen down to await the decision of the Constitutional Court.
No violation of constitutional rights
With its decision of July 9, the Constitutional Court denied preliminary relief. The decision is based on two grounds. First, the Constitutional Court emphasized that in accordance with standing case-law the requirements for preliminary relief are strict, in particular when an opponent aims to prevent the ratification of an international treaty. In the case at hand, the opponents had failed adequately to substantiate why ratification of the UPCA would impinge on their constitutional rights and cause them irreparable harm.
Second, the Constitutional Court disagreed with the argument that article 20 of the UPCA impacted on the primacy of EU law and the established exceptions from that principle under German constitutional law. In accordance with article 20, the UPC shall apply EU law in its entirety and shall respect its primacy. During the court proceedings, the German government argued that this provision merely restates the law when it refers to the primacy of EU law. In its decision, the Constitutional Court agreed and, at the same time, emphasized that it would continue to exercise reserved powers in accordance with its Maastricht and Lisbon judgments.
On a final note, the decision of July 9 also indicates the outcome of the pending proceedings on the merits. The constitutional complaints will be dismissed, because they are inadmissible for the same reasons.