National offices report increases in national patent applications throughout Europe: Is the EPO no longer “killing” the national offices?

No items found.
​
March 27, 2026
The Swedish National Patent Office (PRV) recently reported a 13 per cent year‑on‑year increase in national patent applications in 2025. A review of available data from across the EPO area suggests that this is not an isolated development. On the contrary, a similar trend appears to be emerging across much of Europe. In this article, we take a closer look at the numbers and consider what may bedriving this shift.

The numbers

Increase in national applications

Let us start with the data. As of writing, figures for national patent applications in 2025 are available for Germany [1], France [2], Italy [3], Sweden [4], Austria [5], Spain [6] and Norway [7] [8]. All of these national offices reported an increase in filings, ranging from approximately 4 per cent at the Austrian Patent Office to almost 40 per cent at the Norwegian NIPO.

This marks a clear departure from the long‑term trend. Historically, national patent filings in Europe have shown a slow but steady decline. The graph below illustrates the number of patent applications, both first filings and PCT national phase entries, normalised against each country’s 2014 filing level.

For context, in 2014 the number of applications was 65,963 in Germany, 16,533 in France, 9,385 in Italy, 2,425 in Sweden, 2,363 in Austria, 3,178 in Spain and 1,627 in Norway. From 2014 onwards, most offices experienced a gradual decrease. While some saw early signs of recovery in 2023, 2025 stands out as the first year in which all of the reviewed offices show a clear increase.

Why now?

It is still too early to determine whether this development represents a lasting shift. More data over coming years will be needed to assess its statistical significance. Nevertheless, the fact that the increase appears across multiple jurisdictions suggests that common, Europe‑wide factors may be at play.

The German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), for example, notes strong growth in filings relating to computer technology and digital communications, which are fields characterised by extensive use of machine intelligence [2]. The DPMA also reports an increase in applications relating to electrical drives, a core technology underpinning electrification in transport, industry and power generation. This may be an early signal that the green transition is translating into increased patenting activity.

Historical data from EPO CA/F reports

In Italy and Austria, the respective patent offices highlight another driver: universities have become increasingly active filers [3] [5]. The incentives for academic researchers to protect intellectual property appear to be strengthening. In Italy, this trend may in part be linked to the abolition of the professor’s privilege in 2023, a reform that shifted ownership of employee inventions to universities and paved the way for more institutional filings [3].

PRV, meanwhile, points to the continued popularity of the EUIPO patent fund for small and medium‑sized enterprises, which has now been running for five consecutive years and provides financial support for IP protection [4].

The rise of self‑drafting and AI

Both PRV and the Norwegian NIPO also report a notable increase in individual inventors filing without professional representation. According to PRV, the number of applicants without representatives doubled in 2025 [4]. NIPO similarly observes a large number of applications that appear to have been drafted using AI tools [7].

From an inventor’s perspective, the appeal is obvious. Compared with the cost of professional representation, access to an AI chatbot is inexpensive, and national filing fees are often relatively low. In many cases, this reduces the upfront cost of seeking patent protection from several thousand euros to just a few hundred. Viewed in this light, the trend may be seen as a form of democratisation of the patent system.

There is, however, a less optimistic side. National offices report that AI‑drafted applications often lack clarity and contain formal deficiencies. Once substantive examination begins, such shortcomings can be difficult to remedy without professional assistance. Moreover, while AI tools may lower the entry barrier, they do not necessarily make the patent system more transparent for inventors, who may struggle to prompt these tools to address examiner objections effectively.

The growing use of AI as an ideation tool raises additional questions. Many jurisdictions have made it clear, for example in the DABUS cases, that artificial intelligence cannot itself be an inventor. At the same time, concerns remain around training data and its implications for novelty and inventive step, particularly where models are trained on data of uncertain provenance.

Conclusion

The recent increase in national patent filings points towards several positive developments across Europe. SMEs appear more engaged in protecting their innovations, activity in green and machine‑intelligence‑related technologies is rising, and access to the patent system may be broadening.

At the same time, the growth in AI‑assisted self‑drafting may increase the workload of national offices without necessarily leading to a corresponding rise in granted patents. In the longer term, this raises an interesting question: will the role of national patent offices evolve further, placing greater emphasis on education and guidance for individual inventors?

References

[1] DPMA, “Aktuelle Statistiken: Patente,” 24 February 2026. [Online]. Available:  https://www.dpma.de/dpma/veroeffentlichungen/statistiken/patente/index.html.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

[2] INPI, “INPI Key  Figures 2025,” 03 February 2026. [Online]. Available:  https://www.inpi.fr/en/a-la-une/chiffres-cles-inpi-2025. [Accessed 23 March  2026].

[3] UIBM, “Mimit: Report  Brevetti +18,2% nel 2025,” 02 March 2026. [Online]. Available:  https://www.mimit.gov.it/it/notizie-stampa/mimit-report-brevetti-18-2-nel-2025.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

[4] PRV, “Trendbrott i antal ansökningar till PRV,” 12 March  2026. [Online]. Available:  https://www.prv.se/sv/om-oss/nyheter/okning-av-antalet-ansokningar-till-prv/.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

[5] Österreichisches  Patentamt, “Österreich erfindet wieder deutlich mehr: Patentamt verzeichnet  Anstieg bei Anmeldungen,” 05 March 2026. [Online]. Available:  https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20260305_OTS0042/oesterreich-erfindet-wieder-deutlich-mehr-patentamt-verzeichnet-anstieg-bei-anmeldungen.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

[6] Elzaburu, “Récord de  solicitudes en 2025: las cifras clave de Propiedad Industrial en España,” 03  March 2026. [Online]. Available:  https://elzaburu.com/record-solicitudes-propiedad-industrial-2025-oepm/.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

[7] Patentstyret, “Økning i norske patentsøknader,” 25 February  2026. [Online]. Available:  https://kommunikasjon.ntb.no/pressemelding/18812322/okning-i-norske-patentsoknader?publisherId=4739852&lang=no.  [Accessed 23 March 2026].

‍

‍

The Latest Thought Leadership pieces in the Content Hub

No items found.
Stay in the Know

The Patent Strategist

Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Heading
This is some text inside of a div block.
This is some text inside of a div block.

Latest Insights

Showing 0 of 100
Quantum IP Strategy: Own control Points, Not Patent Counts
14 October 2026
In quantum, the strongest portfolios will not be the biggest. Stuart Malcolm sets out six moves for owning the control points the market cannot route around, and the questions investors will ask.
#
Consulting
​
Targeted, Not Transformative: The UKIPO’s Considered Course on SEPs
13 October 2026
Andrew Sharples analyses the UKIPO's response to its SEP consultation, exploring proposed changes to FRAND dispute resolution, SEP transparency and licensing guidance, and what they mean for SEP holders and implementers.
#
Consulting
​
Chinese Companies in European Patent Litigation
30 September 2026
Chinese companies are becoming increasingly active in European patent litigation, both as defendants and as patent owners enforcing their own rights. This article examines the growing role of Europe and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in global patent disputes, highlighting key cases involving Chinese businesses and the strategic opportunities and risks that come with operating in European markets. It is the first in a series exploring the practical implications of European patent enforcement for Chinese companies.
#
Patenting
​
How to mitigate prior art traps for follow-on pharma patents
27 August 2026
Follow-on patents are increasingly important for pharmaceutical innovators. Learn how new EMA clinical trial disclosure rules create prior art risks and discover practical strategies to protect pharmaceutical IP and maximise patent value.
#
Consulting
​
Chinese companies and the UPC: from enforcement targets to strategic users
13 August 2026
Chinese companies are playing an increasingly significant role in UPC litigation, accounting for around 38% of infringement actions in 2025. While many remain defendants, a growing number are actively using the Unified Patent Court to enforce their own patent rights across Europe. The trend highlights the UPC's rising importance for Chinese businesses operating in sectors such as telecommunications, semiconductors, medical devices and renewable energy, and signals a shift in global patent enforcement strategy.
#
Patenting
​
Evaluating the environmental impact of patent AI.
31 July 2026
AI's environmental impact is rarely out of the headlines, but how does it compare to the benefits it delivers in practice? In this article, Laurence Brown examines the energy use of AI-assisted patent drafting, comparing it with traditional drafting workflows. While measuring AI's true environmental footprint is far from straightforward, the analysis suggests that AI-assisted patent drafting may already be more energy efficient, while delivering significant productivity gains for patent professionals.
#
Patenting
​
UPC appeals after three years: Early indications on appeal success rates
15 July 2026
Three years into the UPC, appeal overturn rates sit at 56% for both substantive and preliminary injunction cases, with Kodak v Fujifilm among the rulings reshaping outcomes on appeal.
#
Litigation
​
The UPC After Three Years: From Experiment to Enforcement Forum
15 July 2026
1,282 cases filed at the UPC in three years: infringement actions have surged while revocation filings stayed flat, easing fears the Court would become a European patent graveyard.
#
Litigation
​
Podcast: Building an AI-Native Law Firm
26 June 2026
On the Technically Legal podcast, EIP partner Laurence Brown discusses how Visser AI is redesigning patent workflows, letting the firm offer fixed fees without trading away speed or quality.
#
Patenting
​
Choosing your SEP battleground: UPC, Germany or UK?
07 June 2026
Choosing the right venue for SEP litigation can significantly influence the outcome of FRAND disputes. This article compares the UPC, German and UK courts, examining their approaches to injunctions, FRAND defences, rate-setting and enforcement. It highlights the strategic advantages of each jurisdiction and explains why many SEP owners are increasingly turning to the UK and UPC as part of their European enforcement strategy.
#
Litigation
​
Synthetic Lethality & AI: IP Strategy in Oncology
26 May 2026
This article explores the resurgence of synthetic lethality in precision oncology, highlighting how AI and machine learning are accelerating the discovery of new therapeutic targets. It also examines growing clinical activity, investment, and the evolving intellectual property challenges shaping this emerging field.
#
Consulting
​
Inside the Visser AI Launch Party
20 May 2026
EIP has officially launched Visser AI®, our hybrid intelligence service for patent drafting and prosecution. Watch the launch film from our event at The Boundary in Shoreditch, and discover how our team of European and US patent attorneys — working with the Patently AI platform , delivers faster, lower-cost work at the EPO, USPTO and beyond.
#
Consulting
​
Protecting Your Startup: Five Intellectual Property Mistakes to Avoid
20 May 2026
Early‑stage startups often focus on product development and fundraising, but overlooking intellectual property (IP) can seriously damage long‑term value. This article explores five common IP mistakes startups make, with a particular focus on patents. It covers the risks of filing patents without professional advice, making public disclosures too early, failing to put enforceable contracts in place with third parties, misunderstanding what patent rights actually provide, and neglecting to develop a clear IP strategy. By highlighting these pitfalls and offering practical guidance, the article helps startups protect their innovations, strengthen their commercial position, and improve their prospects with investors.
#
Consulting
​
Technology, Patents, and Sport
13 May 2026
VAR, goal-line tech, AI 3D player avatars, wearable trackers, the technology reshaping the 2026 World Cup and elite sport rests on a patent system that makes the R&D investment behind it worth taking.
#
Patenting
​
Patents or Trade Secrets? When to Patent in Deep Tech Innovation
11 May 2026
Deep tech companies face unique IP challenges due to long development cycles, high upfront investment, and complex technologies that combine products and processes. This article explores when patents, trade secrets, or a combination of both offer the strongest protection. It explains how factors such as detectability, reverse engineering risk, disclosure to third parties, and employee mobility should shape IP strategy decisions. While patents are often best suited to externally visible or licensable technologies, trade secrets can be highly effective for internal processes and know‑how that deliver performance or cost advantages.
#
Patenting
​