The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has published a comprehensive study examining the economic performance of companies holding Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) compared to those without such rights. The analysis, covering 119,000 firms across 27 EU member states from 2013 to 2022, reveals that IPR-holding companies generate 23.8% more revenue per employee, with this advantage rising to 41% when adjusted for various factors. The study also highlights that these firms pay 22% higher wages on average. Notably, while only 10% of SMEs register IPRs, those that do report 44% higher revenue per employee compared to their non-IPR counterparts.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has announced that it will consolidate its online filing tools for trade marks and designs from 1 July 2026 by integrating the existing Easy Filing forms into the standard online filing process. The change, which coincides with the implementation of the final phase of the Designs Legal Reform, aims to reduce duplication between tools and simplify navigation, helping users identify the appropriate filing option and complete their applications more easily. The filing process itself remains unchanged, with Fast Track examination continuing to be available where applications meet the required conditions. EUIPO will update the relevant website pages, FAQs and guidance materials in advance of the upcoming changes.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) implemented new examination guidelines for registered European Union designs on 1 May 2025, reflecting changes from Regulation (EU) 2024/2822. Key modifications include the shift from registered community designs to registered European Union designs, elimination of national office filing options, removal of unity of class requirements, and new provisions for decisions on surrendered designs. The guidelines also address changes to priority effects, entitlement proceedings, fee structures and renewal period calculations.

The EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has updated its staff guidelines on the responsible use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools. Issued by the Executive Director of EUIPO, João Negrão, the updated guidelines replace the 2023 version and align EUIPO's approach with the EU AI Act and European Commission guidance on responsible AI use. The updated guidelines explain how GenAI can be used safely and transparently across EUIPO, while ensuring human oversight, data protection and legal compliance. They also introduce rules on prompting and information handling, distinguishing between public, restricted, confidential and secret information and emphasise the need for verification and review of AI-generated outputs for factual accuracy, bias, hallucinations and copyright issues before use or dissemination.

Law360, London: The EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) could begin mediating disputes between copyright holders and developers of AI, the agency's chief told the EU's parliament 12 May 2025.

means the European Union Merger Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 (OJ 2004 L24/1. 29.1.2004), as amended

The euro zone inter-bank offer rate for the euro. The rate at which banks offer to lend euros to other banks.

The European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (EUROJUST) has reported on the takedown of servers of infostealers, a type of malware used to steal personal data and conduct cybercrimes worldwide, which took place on 28 October 2024 during a worldwide operation. The takedown follows an investigation into RedLine and Meta after victims came forward and a security company subsequently alerted authorities to potential servers linked to the software. EUROJUST reports that three servers were shut down in the Netherlands, two domains were seized, unsealed charges in the United States, and two individuals were arrested in Belgium. This was done by a multinational coalition of authorities from the Netherlands, the United States, Belgium, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

The Home Office has updated its main EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) guidance for changes to HC 590, in particular confirming that while persons will now be able to obtain indefinite leave to remain ‘early’ under Appendix Domestic Abuse, where they previously had pre-settled status under Appendix EU, it is only possible to convert settlement granted on another basis to settlement under Appendix EU if that was obtained prior to the end of the Brexit transition period. However, it will be open to those persons to subsequently apply for settlement under Appendix EU after five years of continuous residence.

The Home Office has updated its ‘EU Settlement Scheme: EU, other EEA and Swiss citizens and their family members’ caseworker guidance document for changes made to the Immigration Rules, Appendix EU by Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC 997, as well as information on how Home Office travel data should be used in making the continuous residence assessment, and on how pre-settled status holders are now able to retain that status when they obtain another form of immigration leave. Full details are set out below.

One of the counsel to the applicant in the case of R (Krzystofik) v SSHD (The Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements intervening) [2024] Lexis Citation 690, Adrian Berry, has confirmed in his Cosmopolis blog the terms of the Order consequent to the judgment. These provide that the Home Office has consented to publish a revised version of the policy on pausing EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) applications where there is a pending prosecution within three months of the judgment (absent special circumstances) and the current policy will any case be quashed within three months. Also, on publishing its revised policy, the Home Office will review all paused applications as soon as possible. In its decision, the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) had found that alleged criminality should only justify a pause of consideration of an EUSS application where the nature of the criminality, if proven, was capable of justifying a refusal of residence given the relevant EU law expulsion threshold and the requirement that the stay was proportionate. The policy in place since Version 5 of the EU Settlement Scheme: suitability requirements guidance had not allowed for this assessment prior to a pause.

IP analysis: In this preliminary ruling, the Court of Justice held that the absolute grounds for invalidity under Article 52(1)(a) and Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 207/2009 are autonomous but not mutually exclusive. The case arose from CeramTec’s attempt to enforce EU trade marks for pink-coloured ceramic medical components following the expiry of its earlier patent. The Court of Justice confirmed that an applicant may act in bad faith when filing a trade mark application, irrespective of whether the sign meets the conditions for refusal under the ‘technical function’ exclusion in Article 7(1)(e)(ii). The judgment clarifies the separate roles of these provisions and confirms that the assessment of bad faith must focus solely on the applicant’s intention at the time of filing. Written by Vincent Liu, associate (IP) at JMW Solicitors LLP.