Over at the Social Science Research Network, Matthew Parish has a fascinatingessayon the problem of accountability of international organisations. Political oversight, Parish suggests,is generally weak, yet most international organisations seem to operate in a legal vacuum as well, withwide-ranging immunity from national legal proceedings. Parish's analysis concludes that the legalimmunities enjoyed by international organisations are in need of review.

Bruno van Pottelsberghe's latest paper, "The Quality Factor in Patent Systems" puts forward a new methodology that aims atcomparing quality across patent systems.

Quality is defined as the extent to which patent systems comply with their own patentability conditionsin a transparent way. This definition makes it possible to gauge quality using a two-layer framework:the first layer is composed of the legal standards that describe the patentability conditions of anational patent system (subject-matter, novelty, inventiveness, fees). The second layer is characterisedby the operational design put in place to meet those legal standards.

The staff representation has regularly criticised recruitment practice at the EPO.After numerous attempts to discuss the matter internally, last year thestaff committee submitted a document (CA/174/09)on the employment conditions forexternal staff to the Administrative Council of the EPO. The document was ignored.Since then a number of complaints have been submitted to national courts.The press (Spiegel andSZ) has reported on these complaints.

In the mean-time an internal appeal filed 4 years ago has matured into a judgment:ILO-AT 2919.The Tribunal ruled that the EPO's General Advisory Committee (GAC),in which the staff representation holds half of the seats, should have been consultedon the Office's outsourcing policy. This is not the only recent judgment onrecruitment procedures filed by staff representatives in which the Tribunal foundin favour of the complainant, seeILO-AT 2819,ILO-AT 2762,ILO-AT 2919,ILO-AT 2791and, in the same session ILO-AT 2920and ILO-AT 2921.

It is noted, however, that the amount of damages and costs awarded to the complainantsis diminishing. In the 2919 judgment the threecomplainants were awarded 300 Euros incosts, together. This represents about 1% of the real costs. The Tribunal further carefullyavoided entering into the substance of the case. This means that if the EPO, after GACconsultation, decides to maintain the current practice a new appeal will have to be filed,on which a judgment can then be expected in 4 years.

The 3rd day continued with topics to be discussed in closed session,amongst which further nominations and the level of compensation awardedto delegates. A decision on the Vice-President posts is only expected in October.The open part of the session resumed with a discussion on "Fee reform and sustainablefinancing of the European patent system" as outlined in CA/91/10,CA/82/10,CA/39/10, CA/38/10,CA/36/10,CA/34/10 and CA/33/10.Interestingly, only the representative of epiwas critical of the Office's implicit position that major problems are caused by alarge proportion of applicants "gaming" the system.

The last day of the Council is traditionally the day on which staff matters are dealt with.True to form the proposal on reform of the financing of the sickness insurance,CA/66/10 Rev. 1 and Corr. 1,was the last item on the Council's 3-day agenda.The document was dealt with together with the Central Staff Committee's documentCA/94/10 on the same topic. In a series of questions the Chairman of the Central Staff Committeehighlighted the deficiencies of the proposal and the administration's failure to demonstrate clearlythe need for such fundamental reform. Despite these interventions, 26 of the delegations, includingFrance and Denmark, voted in favour, with 10 delegations abstaining and 1 voting against.With that the decision was passed.

The most important point of the second day of the 124th Council meeting wasthe election of the new Chairman of the Administrative Council. Mr.Kongstad (DK) was the only candidate. Mr. Kongstad has in the pastexpressed himself strongly in favour of decentralisation. His view ofthe European Patent Network was one wherein the EPO would serve as a"back-office" to the national patent offices.

Otherwise the meeting was largely uneventful. Amongst the documents on theagenda were CA/84/10 ("Progress report on the trilateral and IP5")submitted by the President and CA/93/10 ("Work-sharing from anexaminer's perspective") submitted by the Central Staff Committee. Bothwere passed without a comment.

The day ended with the selection of a new VP1 and VP5 in closed session,i.e. without the usual observers from industry (BusinessEurope) and thepatent profession (epi), and without the Staff Committee or other Officestaff. At the time of writing the outcome was not yet known.

The first half day of the 124th meeting of the Administrative Council was relatively uneventful.

The outgoing President, Ms. Brimelow, presented the 2009 activities report(CA/44/10).The efforts made by the Office to limit expenses and increase productivity have paid off.This has led to a positive operational result under IFRS and to a decrease in unit costs.In contrast positive results from the SPP project (Single Patent Process)would have to wait for her successor. The Office presented for the first time a document(CA/79/10 rev.1) on current trends of activityin the national patent offices and the EPO.

The day ended with a discussion about the procedure for the upcoming selection of theChairman and Vice-Chairman of the Administrative Council, itself scheduled for tomorrow.Most delegations intervened in favour of more transparency.

The Administrative Council of the EPO will meet from 28 to 30 June in Munich.The agenda (CA/71/10) numbers about 60 pointsand a roughly equal number of supporting documents.The election of a new Chairman of the Administrative Council and the appointments ofnew Vice-Presidents for DG1 (search and examination) and for DG5 (legal matters) areamongst the more important internal matters to be dealt with. Topics of interest forthe external stakeholder include those concerned with fee reforms, and withco-operation at European and at global level.

The Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO) has recently sent a letterto the Members of the European Parliament pleading for accessionof the European Union to the European Patent Organisation.

Bruno van Pottelsberghe has just published a policy brief entitled"Europe should stop taxing innovation".In this paper he argues the'enhanced' patent system proposed by the Competitiveness Council in December 2009 may actually weaken the patent system in Europe.

Richard Yung's views on the composition of the Administrative Council in the light of the recent Presidential election.