Brexit will simply force us to adapt and evolve

Pan-european intellectual property advisor Murgitroyd has all scenarios covered

The British are very able to adapt to whatever new rules and new conditions emerge Our Pan-european network of offices means we’ve got all eventualities covered, giving us an edge over competitors My best guess is that the filing of patent applications will continue as before

Intellectual property advisor Ian Murgitroyd remembers the disruption caused when the UK joined the EU, and he’s ready for the challenges ahead, writes

DURING the course of a long career devoted to helping clients protect their intellectual property (IP), Ian Murgitroyd, the Chairman and founder of European patent and trade mark attorneys, Murgitroyd, has seen the knowledge economy grow by leaps and bounds. Today, IP constitutes much of the core value of vast numbers of businesses, both large and small.

“Innovation and the drive to invent new products is a fundamental part of entrepreneurial activity. Protecting IP is fundamental both to safeguard core assets and to provide confidence to outside investors and business partners,” he notes.

Murgitroyd decided to set up his own patent attorney business over forty years ago after training with Glasgow-based Fitzpatricks, whom Murgitroyd went on to acquire a number of years later.

“When we began, it was just myself and a secretary. Today, we have 280 staff across 16 offices around the world. It has been a fascinating journey,” he says.

One of the most exciting chapters of that journey was when the firm floated on AIM 17 years ago.

“We launched with a share price of £1.21, and over the years, our share price has appreciated significantly. Being listed has been very rewarding in all sorts of ways – not least because it allowed us to expand into the US. We started the US operation with a laptop and a rented desk and today some 50 per cent of our business comes from our two US offices,” he says.

Unlike many in either the “Leave” or the “Remain” camps, Murgitroyd is of an age such that he has a clear recollection of what things were like immediately after the UK’S entry into the Common Market, as it was then. The UK had been trying to get in for years, but General de Gaulle was vehemently opposed to even exploratory membership talks with the UK. In de Gaulle’s view, fulsomely expressed in a press conference the General gave in 1967, Britain was in a mess and sterling was in an even bigger mess.

A chronic balance of payments deficit, exchange controls, and the British habit of sourcing what we wanted globally instead of exclusively or largely from the EU, were all insuperable issues for the man the UK had sheltered through World War II. We just weren’t fit for the decent society the Europeans were forging out of the nascent EEC, in de Gaulle’s implacable view.

“When de Gaulle died, French opposition to our membership fell away and Ted Heath, the then Prime Minister had little trouble taking us into the EU,” he recalls.

“There was some initial disruption when we joined, and we just have to accept that when we leave, UK businesses will again experience some degree of disruption. However, the British generally are very able to be flexible and to adapt to whatever new rules and new conditions may emerge,” he says. Murgitroyd points out that while there are a number of things, even in the specialised field of IP protection, that are up in the air and have yet to be defined, the same was true when we went into the Common Market back in 1973.

“We were in the same position then of not knowing what some of the rules would be. The politicians assured us that the UK’S entry would be seamless, but things were disrupted for a short period,” he notes. One example of this disruption was that much of what was done to protect IP post the UK’S entry in 1973 had to be covered under Article 110 of the Treaty of Rome. All pre-existing distributor licenses and agreements had to be redone.

“I can see the new set of rules that will emerge after Brexit requiring similar levels of adaption and I am sure this will happen without real difficulties. It would be nice to know these rules in advance, which we don’t, but when they emerge people will move to adopt them smoothly enough,” he says.

History is full of ironies, and Murgitroyd points out that when Harold Wilson forced a referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the Common Market in 1975, two years after we joined, some 85 per cent of those who voted said we should remain in the EU. “This was despite all the disruption that took place through those intervening two years, so clearly whatever issues there were, were not seen as huge then, and I imagine the disruption that lies ahead will probably be dealt with in much the same fashion,” he says.

One of the areas of uncertainty with Brexit, Murgitroyd points out, concerns the fate of trade marks. Where UK firms have registered their trade mark protection in the EU, there is now some question as to whether that protection will continue to extend to the UK post-brexit.

“There are various suggestions being considered to cover this, including perhaps requiring re-registration of EU trade marks. I am pretty sure that people will continue to have their rights recognised but there is much to be discussed.

“Whatever happens, we will be able to adapt our services appropriately,” he says.

Fortunately, the legal underpinning of patents lies outside the Treaty of Rome and the European Commission’s remit, having been established under a separate treaty. The European Patent Convention and the European Patent Office are independent of the EU and have always had a number of non-eu members, such as Switzerland, Norway and Turkey.

At present, there are proposed legal mechanisms that would enable the UK to participate in the proposed Unitary Patent post-brexit.

There are still key questions to be settled, but the idea is that when the Unitary Patent is finally ratified by all the countries involved, companies will be able to choose to lodge one Eu-wide application and have patent protection in all participating countries, as well as the right to litigate through a single court.

“My best guess is that the filing of patent applications by UK companies will continue as before, though there might be some additional administrative burdens,” Murgitroyd says.

“Whatever happens, our clients can be sure that we can continue to represent them effectively in the UK and the wider EU due to our pan-european office network spread throughout the UK and 5 further EU countries.

“Change happens and I see this one as an opportunity.”