Reforms to the Patents County Court following the Jackson report aim to make justice in IP litigation more accessible. This article examines what has changed and why.

Background

The Patents County Court (PCC) was set up in 1990. It was originally intended to deal with smaller and less complex IP litigation on a more cost effective basis than the High Court. However after the advent of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) whether claimants chose to issue in the PCC or the High Court, the procedural and costs implications were the same. In Lord Justice Jackson’s recent report on civil litigation costs, he expressed concern over the high costs of IP litigation and that this may restrict access to justice.

Proposals

In consequence the Intellectual Property Court Users’ Committee conducted a full review into this issue, submitting its final report in July 2009. Lord Justice Jackson endorsed the proposals of the IPCUC, which were as follows:

PCC procedures should be reformed and streamlined;

  • The total recoverable costs in PCC cases should be capped and subject to a scale-fee system;
  • The financial remedies available in the PCC should be subject to a limit of £500,000;
  • The PCC should be re-named “the Intellectual Property County Court” to reflect its true function.

Lord Justice Jackson also recommended that the PCC have a small claims track for IP claims below £5,000 and a fast track for IP claims between £5,000 and £25,000. In addition, it was suggested that the PCC should have access to one or more district judges with the relevant experience to deal with any claims allocated to these new tracks.

 

Reforms

From 01 October 2010, the Civil Procedure Rules were amended to include provisions that would make PCC procedure more straightforward. The changes include a provision that the parties set out their respective cases fully but succinctly at the outset. However, thereafter no further evidence, written submissions or specific disclosure will be allowed. The PCC will endeavour to deal with any applications without a hearing (if at all possible) and all PCC trials should be limited to one or two days. In addition the recoverable costs have been capped at £50,000 for a claim relating to liability and £25,000 for an inquiry as to damages or account of costs.

On 14 June 2011, the Patents County Court (Financial Limits) Order 2011 came into force which limited the value of PCC claims to £500,000 (excluding any non-contractual interest and costs). Any claims which exceed that sum must now be issued in the High Court.

It is intended that the PCC will be renamed “the Intellectual Property County Court” however this will require an Act of Parliament and so this has not yet been implemented.

 

Comment

These reforms are intended to promote access to justice for lower value IP litigation. By reducing the recoverable costs and streamlining procedures, it is hoped that costs will no longer be a barrier to justice in the PCC. In addition, the financial limit on claims and different costs / procedural implications will help to differentiate the PCC (which aims to deal with lower-value claims) from the High Court (which will handle the more complex, higher value claims).

 

For more information on this or any other similar IP law issue, please contact Liane Bylett or Clive Lee by emailing Liane or Clive or by calling them on 08450 990045, or speak to your usual contact in the Commercial Disputes Team.