It is high time to continue our series of interviews with Unified Patent Court (UPC) decision-makers. Last year we interviewed (in chronological order) Presiding Judge Dr. Walter Schober (Vienna Local Division) and now-Presiding Judge András Kupecz (Central Division, Munich seat) as well as Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC) Director Aleš Zalar.
We’ve now had the pleasure to talk to Presiding Judge Camille Lignières of the Paris Local Division.
As a matter of courtesy, the original interview was conducted in French.
Ip fray: Judge Lignières, thank you for joining us. You have presided over various cases in the Paris Local Division, but you have also served on panels in other countries. When you started your judicial career, would you have imagined sitting on the bench in other countries, other than hypothetically becoming a CJEU judge?
Judge Lignières: Initially, my first vocation was to become a judge. I studied political science and law. I believe in the role of law as a tool for positively impacting society, and society is now becoming more global. That’s why I specialized, with respect to civil law, very much in European law, such as intellectual property as well as competition law. This specialization in laws governing the European market made it necessary and created the opportunity to network with other European judges specializing in these fields in order to improve my own practice of the law. I really enjoy working and discussing with my European colleagues. All of this naturally led me to apply for a judgeship with the UPC.
Ip fray: Interestingly, you just said UPC even though we’re talking in French, where the official term is JUB [Juridiction unifiée du brevet].
Judge Lignières: Yes, absolutely. I’ve become used to this acronym because we are an international court and we use it all the time now.
Ip fray: When you join other Local Divisions, your function changes from presiding judge to side judge. How much of a difference does it make on a UPC panel whether one presides over the proceedings, also compared to French courts?
Judge Lignières: I actually wear multiple hats at the UPC. I’m the presiding judge of the Paris Local Division and simultaneously a member of the Presidium, and I join, as well, other local divisions. This allows me to have a broad overview of the Court’s operations, knowing the perspectives of my colleagues around me and what it means to be a “traveling judge”, whose role I consider essential in an international court. This means I see how we sit on the panels of other divisions. I draw inspiration from the best practices of international judges who come to Paris and vice versa. For instance, I have a very precise schedule for the preparation of hearings and that may also have inspired judges from other divisions.
The third legally qualified judge arrives on the eve of the hearing and knows the record inside out. In many cases, the third judge already becomes involved in the event of a panel review of a procedural order. The objective is to have a fluid exchange amongst us, leading to an even more harmonized approach.
The exchange of views on a concrete case across our different cultural backgrounds enriches the debate, but our backgrounds aren’t all that different, given that we’re all immersed in European law.
Ip fray: What are the dynamics like when two judges are permanent members of a given Local Division and a third legally qualified judge joins from elsewhere? Do the two “locals” talk to each other more often about the case just as a result of proximity?
To Read The Full Story
Continue reading your article with a Membership
Aurélie Schaeffer contributed to this interview in multiple ways.