Technically Qualified Judges in the Unified Patent Court 统一专利法院中具备技术资质的法官 Xavier Seuba Senior Researcher and Lecturer, CEIPI 沙维尔·塞乌巴（Xavier Seuba） 斯特拉斯堡大学国际知识产权研究中心（CEIPI）高级研究员兼讲师 EU-China Intellectual Property Forum: Insight IP-Future perspectives 中欧知识产权论坛：知识产权未来展望 10 May 2015 2015年5月10日 Suzhou, Renmin University Suzhou Campus 中国人民大学苏州校区

Science, law... and patent law 科学，法律... 与专利法 Growing relevance of technical and scientific data in contemporary litigation 当代诉讼与科技数据的关联度越来越高 In the US, judges must determine whether scientific evidence is “reliable” and will “assist the trier of fact” (the jury). 在美国，法官必须判定科学证据是否“可靠”，是否能“帮助事实查明人”（陪审团）。 Gatekeeping role - Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) 把关作用 – Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals （1993年） However, judges are not necessarily well-versed in the technical fields over which they act as gatekeepers 但是，法官并不需要精通其担任把关者的技术领域 Patent law is one of the most complex legal areas, both from the legal and technical point of view 从法律和技术两方面来说，专利法都是最复杂的法律领域之一 Lay persons, including judges, will frequently have a hard time to understand the facts and technologies object of litigation 包括法官在内的外行人，往往很难理解诉讼中的事实和技术事项

Patent-inexperienced judges must often spend an “inordinate expense of time" merely to understand the technological jargon and pass on technological issues. Parke-Davis v. Mulford, 189 Fed. 95 at 115 (S.D. N.Y. 1911) 中文 缺乏专利经验的法官往往为了理解技术术语和传达技术争议，就要花费“非同寻常的时间” 。Parke-Davis v. Mulford, 189 Fed. 95 at 115 (S.D. N.Y. 1911)

Complexity in patent law & litigation 专利法和专利诉讼的复杂性 Patent law: club of experts 专利法：专家的专属领地 Institutions and actors involved in patent litigation become more and more specialized 参与专利诉讼的机构和人士的 专业化程度越来越高 Patent attorneys, patent examiners, patent lawyers and, in some jurisdictions, patent judges (both legal and technical) 专利代理人、专利审查员、专利律师，以及一些司法管辖区内的专利法官（包括法律法官和技术法官） Specific areas and topics of complexity 具有复杂性的具体领域和专题 understanding the innovation 理解创新之处 deciding on whether there is an infringement 判定是否存在侵权 collateral issues: damages, competition… 附带性争议：损害赔偿、竞争等 deciding on the obviousness 判定是否存在显而易见性

Complexity in patent law & litigation 专利法和专利诉讼的复杂性 Specific areas and topics of complexity 具有复杂性的具体领域和专题 understanding the innovation 理解创新之处 deciding on whether there is an infringement 判定是否存在侵权 collateral issues: damages, competition… 附带性争议：损害赔偿、竞争等 deciding on the obviousness 判定是否存在显而易见性

“This patent appeal is another illustration of the absurdity of requiring the decision of such cases to be made by judges whose knowledge of the relevant technology derives primarily, or even solely, from explanations of counsel and who, unlike the judges of the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, do not have access to a scientifically knowledgeable staff” General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jefferson Chem. Co., 497 F.2d 1283, 1284 (2d Cir. 1974) 中文 “本专利上诉再一次展示了这种不可思议的情况，即法官主要甚至只能通过律师的解释了解相关技术，才能对此类案件进行裁判，不像关税和专利上诉法院的法官，他们不用与科技专业人员打交道” General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jefferson Chem. Co., 497 F.2d 1283, 1284 (2d Cir. 1974)

How has patent law responded to the technical and scientific complexity arising from patent litigation? 专利法如何回应专利诉讼中的科技复杂性？ 1. 科学培训计划 2. 机构设计 3. 专家与科学顾问 4. 特定程序部门 1.Scientific training programs 1.科学培训计划 2.Institutional design 2.机构设置 3.Experts and scientific advisors 3.专家与科学顾问 4.Specific procedural spaces 4.特定的程序空间

Institutional design 机构设置 Patent litigation can take place 可由下列机构审理专利诉讼 In ordinary courts 普通法院 In specific courts of the general system 一般体系中的特定法院 In specialized divisions of specific courts 特定法院中的专业化法庭 In independent and fully-fledged specialized courts 独立成熟的专门法院 Specialization may exist in first instance or on appeal (or both) 可在初审或上诉程序（或两者）中实行专门化 Fully-fledged IP courts may exist both in countries following a dual system or a single system 实行二元体系或一元体系的国家中都可设置完备的知识产权法院

Institutional design 机构设置 Fully-fledged IP courts may exist both in countries following a dual system or a single system 实行二元体系或一元体系的国家中都可设置完备的知识产权法院 Dual system＆ special IP court 二元体系与知识产权专门法院 Single system ＆ special IP court 一元体系与知识产权专门法院 Germany 德国 Switzerland 瑞士 Russia 俄罗斯 United Kingdom 英国 Japan 日本 Portugal 葡萄牙 Republic of Korea 韩国

Experts 专家 Understanding the technology and determining the facts frequently require a technical understanding which is provided by experts 理解技术和判定事实时，通常需要专家提供技术说明。 Technical expertise in patent proceedings is obtained by means of i) court appointed experts, ii) experts of the parties, and, in some cases, iii) in-house experts of the court (Russia, Republic of Korea, Japan…) 专利诉讼中的技术专业知识通过以下方式获得：i) 法院指定的专家，ii) 当事方的专家，以及部分案件中的iii) 法院院内专家（俄罗斯、韩国、日本等） The role and intervention of parties’ experts changes in each case and also from jurisdiction to jurisdiction 当事方专家的作用和介入在不同案件中有所不同，而且在不同的司法管辖区也存在差异 They are in principle supposed to give objective opinion and assist the tribunal, but… 原则上，他们应给出客观意见，为法庭提供帮助，但是…

The specialization of judges 法官的专业化 An important response to scientific difficulty consists in promoting the specialization of judges 对科学障碍的一个重要回应是，促进法官的专业化 LQJ: a legally trained patent specialist judge 具备法律资质的法官：接受过法律训练的专业专利法官 TQJ: general expert in a certain technical field, such as technical members of the EPO Boards of Appeal, patent attorneys, former patent examiners 具备技术资质的法官：某技术领域的一般专家，譬如欧专局上诉委员会的技术委员、专利代理人、原专利审查员等

The specialization of judges 法官的专业化 The technical judge 技术法官 Translates technical matters to his colleagues and points out possible technical pitfalls 向其他法官解释技术事项，并指出可能存在的技术缺陷 Ensures that the panel understands the relevant technical facts 确保审判小组理解相关技术事实

The specialization of judges 法官的专业化 TQJ are more frequent in dual systems, but not only: 具备技术资质的法官往往存在于二元体系，但并不局限于二元体系： Dual system + technical judges: Austria, Hungary, Germany 二元体系 + 技术法官：奥地利、匈牙利、德国 Single system + technical judges: Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark单 一元体系 + 技术法官：瑞士、瑞典、丹麦 Single system + judges with scientific background: UK, The Netherlands 一元体系 + 具有科学背景的法官：英国、荷兰

Advantages of counting with TQJ 技术法官的优势 了解最新的科学发展动态和专利制度 清晰地鉴别事实，提出适当的问题 降低事实错误的风险 质量 获得理由充分的判决的权利 – 法官了解事实 公正审判 技术法官编写报告的速度约为法院指定专家的12倍，费用却要降低50-70% 节时省钱 技术法官带来的专门化有助于加强统一专利法院在提升社会福利方面的总体效影响 福利 ●keep up with scientific developments ＆ patent practices ●了解最新的科学发展动态和专利实务 ● Clear identification of facts ＆ask the right questions ●对事实有清晰认知，能提出适当的问题 ● Reducedrisk of factual errors ●降低事实错误的机率 Quality 质量 Fair trial 公正审理 ●Right to reasoned sentence-judge understands the facts ●获得说理充分的裁判的权利-法官理解案件事实 Time ＆ Money 时间和成本 ●The cration of a report by a technical judeg is about 12 times faster and costs about 50-70% cheaper than the creation of a report by a court- appointed expert ●技术法官编写案件报告的速度比法院指定专家的12倍，成本却要降低50-70% Velfare 福利 ●Specialization thanks to the TOJ will contribute to the overall welfare effects of the UPC. ●技术法官带来的专门化有助于发挥统一专利法院在提升社会福利方面的总体效应

Last remarks 结语 It is not enough being technically correct: law serves other important values 在技术方面做到正确还不够：法律还要服从其他重要价值 Technical judges are not just “experts”: they pass sentences 技术法官不仅仅是“专家”：他们也进行裁判 The UPC Agreement does not exist in isolation: EU law, competition law, fundamental rights... constitute the broader legal framework for UPC judges 《统一专利法院协定》并不是孤立的：欧盟法律、竞争法 、基本权利…… 构成了关于统一专利法院法官的更广大法律框架

Last remarks 结语 Technical judges of the UPC need to be exposed to a variety of issues such as 统一专利法院的技术法官需要面对各种问题，包括 Judicial ethics 司法道德 Fair trial and patent adjudication 公平的审判和专利裁决 UPC rules of procedure 统一专利法院程序规则 Competition law 竞争法 EU law 欧盟法律 This is the reason why it must be underlined the relevance training, both before being appointed and continuous, as established in the AUPC 这也是《统一专利法院协定》强调法官要在任命前后都要接受相关培训的原因