Introduction
The London Agreement aims to reduce translation costs incurred after the grant of a European patent.  It entered into force on 1 May 2008.  It applies to all patents granted after the entry into force in those member states of the EPC which have signed up to the London Agreement.

Previous Law
When an application is allowed, it is necessary to file a translation of the claims into French and German (assuming that the application is in English).  This has not changed under the London Agreement.

After grant, most member states of the European Patent Convention (EPC) required the filing of a translation of the whole patent specification into the national language of the state in order for the patent to have effect in that state.

The preparation of these necessary translations could account for up to around 40% of the total cost of obtaining a European patent.

The London Agreement
Under the London Agreement, the member states of the EPC are divided into two types:

1.  Countries having English, German or French as an official language

These countries will no longer require a translation of the patent specification in order to validate the granted patent in that country.

2.  Countries having a language other than English, French or German as an official language

These countries will select one of these three languages (English, French or German) and will only require a translation of the patent specification into the selected language (assuming the patent has not been granted in that language).  They may require a translation of the claims of the patent into their national language.

For all countries

As previously, when an application is allowed it is still necessary to file a translation of the claims into French and German (assuming that the application is in English) prior to grant.

It may be necessary to file a translation of the whole patent specification into the national language of a country should the patent become the subject of a dispute in that country.

Countries signed up to the London Agreement
Signing up to the London Agreement is optional.  For countries not signing up, the previous law remains i.e. they may require translation of the whole patent specification into their national language in order for the patent to take effect in their country.

So far, the following countries have approved the Agreement: 

United kingdom	Iceland	Monaco
Germany	Latvia	Netherlands
France	Liechtenstein	Slovenia
Croatia	Lithuania	Sweden
Denmark	Luxembourg	Switzerland

Of these, UK, France, Germany, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco and Switzerland fall under type 1, having either English, German or French as an official language and therefore will require no translation of the specification for validation of the patent in their country.

Denmark, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Slovenia, Croatia and Sweden fall under type 2 as they do not have English, French or German as an official language.  Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Croatia and Sweden have selected English as their language for translation but require translation of the claims into their national language.  Latvia, Lithuania and Slovenia have not selected a particular language, but again require translation of the claims into their national language.

Potential Cost Reductions
The potential translation cost reduction varies depending on which countries are selected for validation.

Of course, cost reductions will be greatest where the validation countries include those which have signed up to the London Agreement although these savings may be negated by the inclusion of validation countries having German/French as an official language and which have not signed up (see Example 4).

Examples are given below for an English language specification:

Example 1 – Validation in UK, France and Germany only

At allowance – translation of claims into French and German
At grant – no further translations needed

Cost savings – significant since translation of whole specification into French and German no longer needed   

Example 2 – Validation in UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain

At allowance – translation of claims into French and German
At grant – translation of whole specification into Italian and Spanish

Cost savings – significant since translation of whole specification into French and German no longer needed   

N.B. Italy and Spain are not expected to join the London Agreement

Example 3 – Validation in UK, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland

At allowance – translation of claims into French and German
At grant – translation of claims into Danish and Swedish, translation of whole specification into Finnish

Cost savings – significant since translation of whole specification into German, Danish and Swedish no longer needed.   

N.B.  Finland may join the London Agreement in due course

Example 4 – Validation in UK, France, Belgium, Germany and Austria

At allowance – translation of claims into French and German
At grant – translation of whole specification into French (for Belgium) and German (for Austria)

Cost savings – none since translation of whole specification into French and German still required

N.B.  Belgium and Austria are not expected to join the London Agreement in the near future

Entry into Force
The London Agreement entered into force on 1 May 2008 and applies to all patents granted on or after that date.

Patents amended post-grant
European patents may be amended post-grant, in opposition, appeal or limitation proceedings. The situation may arise where a patent was granted before entry into force of the London Agreement on 1 May 2008, but amended on or after that date.

In UK, France, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Switzerland, Iceland, Latvia, Netherlands, Slovenia and Sweden the new rules under the London Agreement apply in such situations, such that the translation requirements for the amended patent specification are reduced.

In contrast, in Germany and Denmark the previous translation requirements continue to apply for the amended patent specification in such situations.

Please ask your usual contact for advice on specific cases. 

This information is simplified and must not be taken as a definitive statement of the law or practice.