This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2021/12/01/thomas-jaeger-in-grur/.
Gemini version available ♊︎
Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 8:12 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Image: Prof. Dr. Thomas JaegerProf. Dr. Thomas Jaeger
Image: What news have we heard from the Unified Patent Court (UPC) lately? None, other than there is yet another holdup from yet another constitutional complaint in Germany? Or, none, other than the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has by now repeatedly indicated that the model is incompatible with EU law? True: ten years into the UPC Agreement, all is still on hold and functional, and legal challenges are as unresolved as ever. But no news in this case is good news, it allows time to ponder alternatives. One alternative is actually quite obvious: the Benelux Court of Justice, which just gained significant new powers in mid-2018. This article looks at the lessons to be learned from the Benelux Court and outlines a Benelux-plus Patent Court as a legally safe alternative to the UPC.
Summary: The truth remains unquestionable and the law remains unchanged; Team UPC is living in another universe, unable to accept that what it is scheming will inevitably face high-level legal challenges (shall that become necessary) and it will lose because the facts are all still the same
According to Team UPC (a fake news/propaganda mill which evades very simple questions): “The Unified Patent Court (UPC) will be a court common to the Contracting Member States and thus part of their judicial system.”
=> evades very simple questions
A fake “common” court? This official page tells lies.
“Maybe it would be a good idea to mirror Jaeger’s paper,” found here, according to a reader. “Jaeger argues that the UPC is not a common court as they pretend because it is not linked to National Courts, as (for example) the Benelux court.”
=> ↺ found here
“We don’t expect the UPC to get off the ground for a number of reasons we’ve enumerated and named here in the past.”
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) “could strike it down, as the design of the EU is “CJEU+national courts”.”
Prof. Thomas Jaeger thinks so. And he warned about it 5 years ago as well.
=> ↺ Prof. Thomas Jaeger | ↺ he warned about it 5 years ago as well
This is legal chaos and hackery.
We don’t expect the UPC to get off the ground for a number of reasons we’ve enumerated and named here in the past. Too many times before (to be worth repeating). Do not be misled by a high quantity of fake (worse than low-quality) self-serving lies.
=> high quantity of fake (worse than low-quality) self-serving lies
As our reader notes, even if the UPC ever runs, there is hope of halting it very fast. It’s simply not compatible. As someone put it in comments the other day: “All aboard the Titanic!”
=> ↺ put it
The next comment said: “Time for an appeal to the Austrian Constitutional Court?”
DXThomas then wrote:
It is amazing to see how UPC proponents want to push it through at any cost, and want to ignore the problem of Art 7(2) UPCA. When looking at Art 6(1) ECHR, how can it be justified that the crystal clear wording of Art 7(2) UPC is to be ignored? A first year law student would blush if he came up with the theory of the provisional allocation of the London duties to Paris/Munich.
How can such legally qualified people come up with such legal nonsense? What do the judges think who applied for a job at the UPC?
The UPC proponents act exactly like the Polish government by superbly ignoring the notion of of legally appointed judge.
How can a court be conform with Union law if one of its members can be removed from office without offering him any means of redress? See Art 10 of the statute of the court = Annex I to the UPCA.
The financial interests of the UPC proponents must be extremely high in order to persist in such a way that they ignore fundamental aspects of the legality of the judicial.
Team UPC is just being very loud because public comments keep correcting it, so it’s trying to compensate by sheer volume, believing that shouting down the truth will be worthwhile. FAKE IT TILL YOU MAKE IT? Courts don’t work that way and the law is on the UPC opponents’ side. The “sceptics” know how constitutions and courts work. We may not have as many lobbyists and a generous “fake news” budget, but justice will prevail at the end, as it has for over a decade already. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink > Image: Mail
Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).