In a joint missive addressed to the EU Directorate General for Health and Food Safety , AIPH , CIOPORA , Euroseeds and Plantum have request that the European Commission considers go over the Council Regulation ( EC ) No 2100/94 ( canonic regulation ) on the protection of Community Plant Variety Rights ( CPVR ) . The joint effort was prompt by the non - inclusion of the Community Plant Variety Rights ( CPVR ) system in the EU IP Roadmap , the papers that draws a plan for the betterment of IP protection law and mechanisms in the EU .
An effective plant training sector is essential for a change of societal goal such as amend sustainable production system and consumer quality of farming and horticultural products . The European Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy will not redeem their goals without plant training . Breeders ask an efficacious information processing system for continue to invest in this important oeuvre . It is of utmost importance for stock breeder and cultivator that the EU Plant Variety Rights system is robust and effective .
Pointing out a issue of provisions in the Basic Regulation that want improvement , the organization fence that , however robust in the international comparison , the 25 - year - sometime CPVR scheme fail to adapt to the latest developments in global agriculture , horticulture and works fosterage technologies . Already in 2011 , the last report of the Evaluation of the Community Plant Variety Right Acquis had requested an betterment of the Basic Regulation , but no legislative actions have been taken since .
The recent decisiveness of the European Court of Justice ( CJEU ) in pillowcase C-176/18 ( Nadorcott ) regarding Mandarin Chinese trees that were commercialised by a licensed raiser without permission of the breeder in the period between the coating and the assignment of the right disclose the weakness of the probationary trade protection and the protection of harvested material under CPVR . This does not provide an incentive for breeder to commercialize their varieties before a PVR is granted . particularly in the case of fruit trees this is a serious problem as the examination time period needed before the right is award can easily take six years . what is more , the modified scope of protection for glean material is particularly disadvantageous for horticultural varieties that are grown in territories outside the EU with a depressed - level or no IP protection and are after sold in the EU . This equally affects European stock breeder and cultivator , impoverish peculiarly the latter of their competitiveness against gaudy , IP non - compliant imported ware . Breeders have also called for a skillful enforceability of the Farm Saved Seed supply regarding the payment of the earnings and for a foresightful continuance of CPVR auspices for woody crop , flower bulb and Asparagus .
Next to the joint letter to DG SANTE , which is the European Commission Directorate responsible for Community Plant Variety Rights , the above organisations together with the German and Spanish national seeded player associations and circa 20 item-by-item breeding company , especially yield breeders , have respond similarly to the public consultation of the IP roadmap by DG Growth , the Commission Directorate responsible for for IP right .
For more info : www.aiph.orgwww.ciopora.orgwww.euroseeds.euwww.plantum.nl
