Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-09-Speech-2-232"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020409.10.2-232"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, like everybody else here, I enormously appreciate the work which Mrs Palacio Vallelersundi did as rapporteur, partly because we appreciated so much her work as chair of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market.
I agree very much with the three points she wanted us to focus on, although on one I take a different view. We are all agreed about the importance of preserving a role for national offices. On the second point about jurisdiction, it seems to many of us to have been a part of the genius of the development of the European Community that justice was largely decentralised and that the role of the Community courts in matters particularly of private law and commercial law was an advisory or secondary role, with the main jurisdictions being localised. That is a vitally important principle to keep – if it can be done without destroying the patent regime. As Mr Lehne said, there are wrong roads that we could go down that would end up with a dispersal of Community jurisdictions and parallel jurisdictions between the national systems and the Community system. That would be a great pity. So I hope that the jurisdictional proposals will be accepted.
Then there is the language regime, a question on which I differ, with great respect for Mrs Palacio Vallelersundi, and so does my group. We believe that sustaining the existing system inside the European Patent Office is important. On the other hand, we also believe that people should be able to put forward a patent claim in their own language. We then believe that it should be translated into all the other languages – not the whole process but just, as it says in Amendment No 20(c), "issued in the language of submission and in the official language in which the procedure has been carried out, accompanied by translation of the patent claims and of a short abstract in the other official languages of the Community", and then paragraph (d), "translations shall be performed by the Translation Centre for the bodies of the European Union and costs borne by the European Union".
Preserving the principle of linguistic equality is an important public good of the European Union. The Union should pay for that. It should not become a cost to patent holders. Therefore the objections about over-pricing the European patent would not apply."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples