How to attack a UK patent or application

Many white oars are laid out on a dark wooden surface, arranged in parallel lines with some stacked overlapping.

Reviewed on 6th August 2025

In Europe, the European Patent Convention provides a nine-month “opposition” period following the grant of a European patent in which anyone may try to convince the European Patent Office why the patent shouldn’t have been granted.  #

If an opposition is successful, the patent may be revoked with reduced cost and effort relative to national revocation proceedings or court involvement.

There’s no similar period for patents granted by the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). This means that unless you convince it that an application shouldn’t be granted while it’s still pending, you must start revocation proceedings.

This can make attacking UK patents costly and time-consuming — here’s what you need to know about the process and how you can go about it.

Pre-grant - third-party observations #

While a UK patent application is pending (before it’s granted), anyone may file arguments with the UKIPO as to why it shouldn’t proceed to grant. The arguments must only relate to patentability and an Examiner is obliged to consider them and the associated evidence provided. The UKIPO will acknowledge receipt and notify the applicant of the observations filed, giving them a chance to defend the application.

The third party that filed the observations won’t be informed about any proceedings that may follow. Instead, the progress of the application must be monitored online to determine any effect that the observations have. Further observations may be submitted up until the patent is granted — they may be submitted anonymously and the UKIPO won’t charge a fee for this service.

Post-grant - opinions and the power of the UKIPO #

Before you decide to commit to revocation proceedings once a patent has been granted by the UKIPO, you can ask for an opinion to be issued about whether the patent is valid and/or whether an act would infringe it. While such opinions aren’t binding they can indicate a likelihood of success, should revocation proceedings be brought in the future, and are therefore a useful negotiating tool.

The UKIPO charges a fee of £200 for issuing an opinion. The request is publicly advertised and the patent holder is notified.

If the UKIPO is convinced that a patent is invalid following the issue of a validity opinion, they have the power to revoke the patent themselves, pending the patent holder’s response. Therefore, seeking an opinion on validity can be a cost-effective way of revoking a patent.

Post-grant - revocation #

After grant, proceedings may be brought to have the patent revoked. These can be brought on one or more of the following grounds:

  • patentability (such as lack of novelty or inventiveness)
  • non-entitlement
  • sufficiency of disclosure
  • added subject-matter
  • unallowable broadening of the scope of protection

Except for on grounds of non-entitlement, anyone may begin revocation proceedings at any time after grant. For cases where entitlement is contested, only a person found to be entitled to the granted patent may invoke this ground and may only do so within two years from the grant date. In any case, and in contrast to third-party observations, the person bringing the proceedings does become a party to them.

Revocation proceedings can be brought before the UKIPO, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, or the Patents Court. Where to bring proceedings is initially up to the person seeking revocation, and depends on the complexity of the subject matter, the damages sought and the expense that the person is prepared to bear.

Proceedings before the UKIPO are intended to be quick and inexpensive, while the judges of the Patents Court provide a more rigorous analysis and judgment, as well as greater cost awards. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) was established to provide a medium between these two. Note that the UKIPO can redirect proceedings that were initially brought to them to the courts of their own volition.

A successfully-revoked patent is revoked ex tunc, meaning it’s deemed to never have been granted. Revocation is therefore a potentially powerful tool when backed by strong arguments and evidence and brought in an appropriately chosen forum.

Need help with cancelling a patent or patent application? Get in touch with us.

The logo of the Financial Times features the bold initials "FT" in black on a beige background, with "Financial Times" written below in dark blue.
"IP STARS logo featuring bold dark blue text with a star in the letter 'A,' and yellow 'from Managing IP' text below, on a white background."
Logo displaying the text 'Legal500' in a large serif font.
The SIAAM 300 logo features three red horizontal lines next to bold black and red text, with a minimalist design highlighting the brand name.
Logo with three stacked red rounded bars on the left and a large red M on the right against a white background.
Design resembling the IAM 1000 rating badge featuring the name Murgitroyd, recommended for 2025, on a gray background with bold black and red text.
WTR 1000 logo with blue and black text and beige horizontal lines on a transparent background.
Logo featuring the words "LEXULOGY" and "INDEX" with a design of six dark circles arranged in two columns on the left side.
A round badge with a white interior and gold border, featuring a gold eagle emblem, Chinese characters on a red ribbon, and the text "2024" at the bottom.
The Déla Marken logo features three black stars with shooting lines inside a red circle and the words "DÉCIDEURS MAGAZINE" in bold black and red text below.
Logo for WIPR 2024 featuring the word "Diversity" and the phrase "Influential Woman in IP" on a teal background.
LBG logo featuring a purple circle with white text, alongside "Legal Benchmarking" and "Social Impact Awards 2024" in black and orange text.
A colorful icon with six petal-like shapes in blue, purple, green, and orange surrounding a central circle, with "IP INCLUSIVE" text and a tagline about diversity and inclusion.
A logo with interconnected circles forming a stylized design, accompanied by the text "ADAPT.legal" beneath it.
European Patent Pipeline Program (EPPP) logo with bold pink and dark blue text on a gray background.
Logo for the Legal Sustainability Alliance featuring the acronym "LSA" with leaf and wave designs, and text indicating membership for 2024.
A badge with a blue background, white text reads "Cyber Essentials Certified" with a green checkmark and a stylized checkmark graphic.
Cyber Essentials Plus logo with a blue and green checkmark next to the text on a dark background.
A stylized swoosh design in blue, green, and yellow colors with the text "bvea" and the tagline "invested in a better future" beneath it.
Green globe with swirling lines next to the text "United Kingdom Best Managed Companies" in black.
WIPR Rankings logo with blue letters, a light-blue 'Rankings' badge and gold-gradient 'Highly Recommended Firm' beside 'UK Patents 2025' in light blue.