With the introduction of the Unitary Patent system on June 1, 2023, the European patent landscape has undergone a lasting transformation. While early discussions focused mainly on legal and political questions surrounding the Unified Patent Court (UPC), reliable usage data and practical experience have now taken center stage.
The report “Operation of the Unitary Patent system” published by the European Patent Office (EPO) provides the first consolidated data set, closely aligning with the experiences of many patent law firms and industrial IP departments.
Source: European Patent Office (EPO), Operation of the Unitary Patent system, 2024
Acceptance rates: A system growing – but selectively
According to the EPO, the global acceptance rate of the Unitary Patent for 2025 stands at 28.3%. By comparison, in the first months after the system launch in the second quarter of 2023, the rate was only 17.2%. This development does not indicate an abrupt shift, but rather controlled, strategic growth.
These figures clearly reflect advisory practice. The Unitary Patent is not chosen reflexively, but on a case-by-case basis. For patent law firms, this means that strategic advisory work is becoming increasingly important, while purely formal processing is losing relevance.
Source: EPO, ibid., section “Uptake of Unitary Patents”
Origin of applicants: Europe dominates – for good reasons
The report also shows that requests for unitary effect predominantly originate from the EU and other EPC member states. For 2025, the EPO expects around 40% of applications to come from the EU. Applicants from non-European countries use the Unitary Patent far more cautiously.
From a law firm perspective, this is easy to explain. European companies are more familiar with the legal framework, assess costs and risks more realistically, and recognize the immediate benefits of harmonization. Non-European applicants often pursue globally oriented protection strategies, in which national validations continue to play a central role.
Source: EPO, ibid., chapter “Geographical origin of applicants”
SMEs, universities, and research: Costs as a strategic driver
Of particular relevance to advisory practice is the high share of SMEs, universities, and public research institutions. According to the EPO, around 40% of European Unitary Patent applications originate from these groups.
In law firms that organize their operations using Genese, one pattern is clear: these clients do not expect abstract legal models, but clear, transparent cost arguments. The Unitary Patent is often chosen because:
- validation and translation costs are reduced or eliminated
- administrative processes are simplified
- annual fees become more predictable over the long term
This client group places high demands on transparency and documentation. Without structured file management and reliable cost histories, economically sound advice is hardly possible.
Source: EPO, ibid., section “Profile of applicants”
Industry focus pharma: The Unitary Patent as a functional instrument
The EPO report explicitly highlights that the pharmaceutical sector uses the Unitary Patent at an above-average rate. Practice confirms this observation: in highly regulated, harmonized markets with clearly defined core sales regions, the Unitary Patent offers significant advantages.
From a law firm perspective, it is not the individual right that matters most, but portfolio management:
- Which patents protect core products?
- Which are relevant for enforcement?
- Which play a strategic role in negotiations?
Especially in the pharmaceutical sector, hybrid portfolios are increasingly common: Unitary Patents for central active ingredients, combined with classic national validations for supplementary protection rights. This differentiation requires law firm software capable of managing both systems equally and consistently.
Source: EPO, ibid., section “Technology fields”
Unitary Patent and law firm organization: New complexity, new responsibility
With the Unitary Patent, not just another IP right has been introduced, but an additional decision-making system. Today, law firms must document and clearly justify:
- why a client chose the Unitary Patent
- why the client deliberately opted against it
- which alternatives were considered
- which cost and risk profiles formed the basis of the decision
These requirements directly affect law firm organization. In firms using Genese, it becomes evident that the more structured patents, deadlines, fees, and decision notes are recorded, the more efficient and legally secure this advisory work becomes.
Industrial IP departments: Transparency as a management tool
Industrial companies that manage their IP portfolios via the GWeb Workspace increasingly view the Unitary Patent as a business management instrument.
Today, IP departments require:
- a consolidated view of classic and unitary patents
- transparent cost development over the entire lifecycle
- clear responsibilities between internal teams and external law firms
- a shared working basis with external advisors
The browser-based approach of the GWeb Workspace supports these requirements, particularly for internationally distributed teams.
Conclusion: The Unitary Patent as an advisory task – not an automatism
The data from the European Patent Office, combined with experiences from law firms and industry, paint a clear picture: the Unitary Patent is established and continues to grow – but it is used deliberately and in a differentiated manner.
For patent law firms, this marks a shift in value creation: away from pure procedural handling and toward strategic, data-driven advisory services. Firms that can structure and manage this complexity effectively gain a clear competitive advantage – both professionally and economically.
Top comments (0)