During the preliminary application phase, the Organization will be able to conclude necessary agreements with third parties and formalize all preparatory work carried out by the preparatory committee. One area that cannot be completed before the provisional application phase is the completion of the hiring of judges. This is, of course, a considerable difficulty for the commission. It is only when judges are appointed that both chairs can be elected, the Office can be set up and the Clerk and The Assistant Clerk are appointed. In parallel with developments in Germany, it seems that an agreement is being reached on what will happen in the future of the UPC divisions that should be based in London. They will be responsible for chemical and pharmaceutical patents as well as patents in the field of human necessities. On 17 September, the Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) opposed the new vote on the UPC Act. “Germany will violate three international agreements with the unitary patent,” Wrote Benjamin Henrion, president of the FFII, in an open letter to members of the German Federal Council. London-based Bristows said yesterday that the preparatory committee member states had initially agreed to divide parts of London between the two existing sites so as not to disrupt early ratification.
An agreement on a third site for the central court is considered politically difficult. The United Kingdom remains a “negotiating state” within the meaning of Article 2, point (e), of the Vienna Convention on Treaty Law (VCLT). The United Kingdom has not agreed to the entry into force of the international treaties which it has been involved in the development and adoption of (upCA and the two associated protocols). Therefore, apart from the fact that entry into force is now contrary to a literal interpretation of the relevant provisions of the agreement and protocols, there does not appear to be a basis for the entry into force under Article 24 of the TTC. However, The rapid ratification of Germany is not without controversy. Shortly after the Constitutional Court`s “no” to the German UPC law, the lawyer from Dusseldorf, Ingve Stjerna, said in an opinion to JUVE Patent: “The court did not even rule on the appeals in question and even suggested that the agreement still had constitutional shortcomings. It remains to be seen what conclusions the federal government will draw from this decision. If, despite these problems, the federal government continues to comply with the Convention, a new constitutional review will have to be considered by the Constitutional Court, perhaps a complaint from a company. If the UK has not yet withdrawn from the UPCA, legal uncertainties could arise as it has already withdrawn from the EU.