3.2.3.4. Doubts as to the veracity of the declaration filed under Rule 9(2) UPR

The UPP Division will conduct checks to ensure compliance with the eligibility requirements, i.e. whether the initial applicant(s), if applicable, and the proprietor(s) of the Unitary Patent fall within one of the categories provided for in Rule 8(2) UPR.

If no information is found to confirm compliance with the eligibility requirements or if the information found raises doubts as to the veracity of the declaration filed under Rule 9(2) UPR, the UPP Division will request appropriate evidence confirming the status of the applicant(s)/proprietor(s) (Rule 10(3) and (4) UPR). Such evidence may take the form of an extract from the commercial register or other official documents.

If the evidence filed contains sufficient information to confirm that the status of the applicant(s)/proprietor(s) fulfils the eligibility requirements, the request for compensation will be allowed.

If no or insufficient evidence is filed, the requester will be informed about the intention to reject their request, giving them the possibility to comment under Art. 113(1) EPC, which applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Rule 20(1) UPR. If, after expiry of the time limit, the request still cannot be granted, a final decision to reject the request for compensation will be issued (see 3.2.3.3).

If the UPP Division finds that the request for compensation was granted on the basis of a false declaration, the proprietor will be required to pay an additional fee composed of the compensation amount paid and an administrative fee (amounting to 50% of the compensation amount; Rule 10(4) UPR and Art. 4(2) RFeesUPP) with the next renewal fee falling due for their Unitary Patent. Failure to repay the compensation amount and the administrative fee will result in the lapse of the Unitary Patent (Rules 10(4) and 14 UPR).