UK Supreme Court Alters Patent Examination Protocols Following Emotional Perception AI Ruling

On 11 February 2026, the UK Supreme Court delivered its judgment in the case of Emotional Perception AI Limited v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2026] UKSC 3. This ruling brought about a significant reinterpretation of section 1 of the Patents Act 1977 (as amended), which governs the criteria for patentability in the United Kingdom.

The Supreme Court’s decision has had an immediate effect on the procedures employed by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) in the search and examination of patent applications. In particular, the ruling has influenced the treatment of applications relating to computer-implemented inventions, an area that often presents complex patentability challenges.

Following the judgment, the IPO issued a practice notice divided into two parts. Part 1 provides a summary of the Emotional Perception judgment, outlining the revised approach that patent examiners must take when interpreting and applying section 1 of the Patents Act. This section sets out the legal framework for determining whether an invention qualifies for patent protection.

Part 2 of the practice notice offers practical guidance to examiners on implementing the Supreme Court’s ruling in their day-to-day work. This includes updated instructions on how to conduct searches and examinations under sections 17 and 18 of the Act, ensuring that the new legal standards are consistently applied.

The IPO’s updated practice reflects a commitment to align patent examination processes with the highest judicial authority’s interpretation, thereby enhancing legal certainty for applicants and stakeholders.

The changes are particularly relevant for patent applications involving computer-implemented inventions, which have historically required careful scrutiny to distinguish patentable subject matter from excluded categories.

Applicants and practitioners are advised to review the IPO’s practice notice closely to understand how the Supreme Court’s decision affects examination criteria and to adjust their patent drafting and prosecution strategies accordingly.

The IPO continues to invite feedback from users to improve its services and has provided a survey to gather insights on the updated examination practices.

This development underscores the dynamic nature of patent law in the UK and the importance of staying informed about judicial decisions that impact patentability standards and examination protocols.