Belgium: Translation no longer needed for validating a European patent

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Belgium: Translation no longer needed for validating a European patent

The validation of a European patent in a contracting state is determined by Article 65 EPC, the London Agreement on the application of Article 65 EPC and the contracting state's national law. Hence, validation of a European patent in a contracting state may require the filing of a translation of the European patent as granted into one of the official languages of the contracting state, generally within three months from the date on which the mention of the grant of the European patent is published in the European Patent Bulletin.

Notably, the London Agreement has the objective of reducing costs linked to such validation, more in particular the translation of European patents. Each contracting state which has ratified the Agreement waives the requirement for furnishing such translations entirely or at least largely, depending on its official languages.

Heretofore, Belgium has not yet ratified the London Agreement. Consequently, in Belgium, the validation of a European patent granted in English still requires furnishing, by the prescribed deadline, a complete translation of the description and claims into one of the official Belgian languages (French, Dutch or German).

However, as from January 2017, the furnishing of such a translation to validate a European patent in Belgium will become superfluous!

The Belgian government, at its Council of State, enacted a new law on June 29 2016 which states that a European patent granted, amended after opposition or limited in any of the official EPC languages confers upon the patentee the same rights as a national Belgian patent. Consequently, it might also be expected that the Belgian Government intends to ratify the London Agreement shortly.

This new regime is highly advantageous for patent owners and for the Belgian government, since this major change in Belgian law will reduce both validation costs and a large amount of administrative work at the Belgian Patent Office. Furthermore, this will considerably reduce litigation between companies and the state of Belgium which arises when companies seek to re-instate their rights in Belgium for European patents granted in English if a translation is deemed not to have been properly filed.

Meanwhile, the legislator has reopened a time window, terminating on January 6 2017, for the retroactive reinstatement, under certain conditions, of granted, amended or limited European patents for which a translation was not duly provided to the Belgian Patent Office (See our previous article, 'Patent law harmonised with PLT').

kourgias.jpg
leroy.jpg

Cathy Kourgias

Pascal Leroy


GeversHolidaystraat, 5B-1831 Diegem - BrusselsBelgiumTel: +32 2 715 37 11Fax: +32 2 715 37 00www.gevers.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Erise IP has added a seven-practitioner trademark team from Hovey Williams, signalling its intention to help clients at all stages of development
News of prison sentences for ex-Samsung executives for trade secrets violation and an opposition filed by Taylor Swift were also among the top talking points
A multijurisdictional claim filed by InterDigital and a new spin-off firm in Germany were also among the top talking points
Duarte Lima, MD of Spruson & Ferguson’s Asia practice, says practitioners must adapt to process changes within IP systems, as well as be mindful of the implications of tech on their practices
Practitioners say the UK Supreme Court’s decision could boost the attractiveness of the UK for AI companies
New awards, including US ‘Firm of the Year’ and Latin America ‘Firm to Watch’, are among more than 90 prizes that will recognise firms and practitioners
DWF helped client Dairy UK secure a major victory at the UK Supreme Court
Hepworth Browne led Emotional Perception AI to victory at the UK Supreme Court, which rejected a previous appellate decision that said an AI network was not patentable
James Hill, general counsel at Norwich City FC, reveals how he balances fan engagement with brand enforcement, and when he calls on IP firms for advice
In the second of a two-part article, Gabrielle Faure-André and Stéphanie Garçon at Santarelli unpick EPO, UPC and French case law to assess the importance of clinical development timelines in inventive step analyses
Gift this article