Sponsored by Exensor
www.exensor.com
————————————————————————-
25 Nov 20. German parliament approves funding for new frigate helicopter, tank ammunition, upgraded torpedoes and IT. The budget committee of the Bundestag, the German parliament, has approved funding for the German Navy’s new NH90 Sea Tiger frigate helicopter and tank ammunition, as well as for the upgrade of DM2A4 torpedoes and the Bundeswehr’s IT wide area network (WAN). The German Ministry of Defence (MoD) announced on its website on 20 November that it had approved EUR2.7bn (USD3.2bn) in funding for 31 Sea Tigers, accessories, spare parts, and training. Starting in 2025, the helicopters will replace the German Navy’s Sea Lynx Mk88A frigate helicopters dating from the 1980s. The German MoD said the Sea Tiger would be the Bundeswehr’s only multirole helicopter, providing close protection for frigates, armed with torpedoes and missiles for anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare and conducting transport and search and rescue (SAR) missions. Like the German Navy’s Sea Lion helicopter, the Sea Tiger will be based on the NH90 Naval Frigate Helicopter (NFH), from which the German MoD expects synergies in training, maintenance, and the supply of fuel and spare parts. The Sea Lion is designed mainly for SAR and transport missions, according to the ministry.
Also on 20 November, the German MoD announced that the Bundestag’s budget committee had approved EUR175m in funding the day before for an improved and safer WAN for the Bundeswehr, ammunition for the Leopard 2 main battle tank, and to upgrade DM2A4 heavy torpedoes for U212A submarines. EUR31m was approved to procure 69 kits for the torpedo upgrade and for the accompanying training. (Source: Jane’s)
26 Nov 20. UK issues export fines of over GBP700,000. The UK government has received GBP700,368.01 (USD935,723) in fines between March and September for export control violations, the Department of International Trade revealed in a notice to exporters on 24 November.
Fines of between GBP1,000 and GBP211,250 were issued to exporters across 19 settlement actions for unlicensed exports of dual use goods, military goods and related activity controlled by the Export Control Order 2008.
A spokesperson for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), which handles enforcement actions related to violations of the export regulations, declined to give further details of the fines.
According to the spokesperson, “there are several other options we can, and regularly do, exercise besides criminal prosecutions. These can include raising awareness through outreach, warning letters, compound settlements [fines], and seizure actions.”
“A compound settlement is the means whereby we can offer to settle out of court, through payment of a sum of money, any alleged offence committed under the Customs and Excise Acts. This saves time and money – both for the company and HMRC – by avoiding the need for legal proceedings. We will only offer a compound settlement where we believe we have sufficient evidence to prosecute.“ (Source: Jane’s)
20 Nov 20. EDA’s new defence review urges collaborative approach to six capability areas. During a meeting in Brussels on 20 November, EU defence ministers approved their first full-cycle Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD). Prepared by the European Defence Agency (EDA), the CARD analyses the current and future planned defence spending, research, and capability development goals of EU militaries, while pinpointing how to co-operate on capabilities that boost Europe’s collective defence posture. For example, the new document identifies over 100 collaborative opportunities, including 55 across the following domains: land (17), air (14), maritime (12), cyberspace (3), space (4), and joint/enablers (5).
More specifically, the CARD recommends six priority capability areas that the agency’s 26 member states – all EU countries save Denmark – should collaboratively invest in and develop: main battle tanks (MBTs), patrol vessels, defence in space, soldier systems, counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS) and anti-access/area denial assets (A2/AD), and enhanced military mobility.
“All together, these form a strategic focus for the EU,” EDA Chief Executive Jií Šedivý told reporters on 18 November. “As their current plans are already nailed down, we are aiming to influence the member states’ next planning cycle – after 2025.”
Philippe Leopold, the EDA’s head of co-operation planning, added, “If the member states go for a collaborative approach in these areas, it will have a structuring effect at the EU level.” (Source: Jane’s)
23 Nov 20. Deal or no deal: UK defence industry braces for Brexit. Amid the Covid-19 pandemic, it is easy to forget that the UK will leave the European Union on 1 January 2021, with or without a trade deal. Harry Lye explores how Brexit will affect the UK’s defence industry and how companies are preparing for an uncertain future.
On 31 December 2021, the UK will leave the European Union (EU). That is a fact, as true as the day is long. With or without a deal, on 1 January, the UK’s trading relationship with its closest partners will change fundamentally.
While most of the discourse has become one of chlorinated chickens and ultimatums, Brexit is an issue that could have a severe impact on the UK’s aerospace, defence and security sectors. From new complexities in the supply chain to questions about future state-to-state relationships, how will Brexit affect defence business?
What deal would be best for defence?
“The UK’s aerospace, defence, space and security industries will face major disruption without a deal, through delays to cross-border trade, costly administrative requirements and a new regulatory system,” says ADS Group chief executive Paul Everitt.
According to ADS Group, which represents the interest of the UK’s aerospace, defence and security sector, almost 30,000 jobs in the industry are already at risk as a result of Covid-19, something that could be compounded by Brexit.
In August, the London School of Economics (LSE) estimated that a no-deal Brexit would cause an 8% hit to the UK’s gross domestic product (GDP), equivalent to around £160bn. Such a drop would increase the damage done to the UK’s economy by Covid-19, which has seen the UK’s GDP lose nearly 20 years of growth in the last few quarters.
“A deal that delivers global market access and protects sensitive cross-border supply chains is essential,” Everitt adds. “Industry needs to focus on recovering from the pandemic and achieving net-zero aviation, rather than battling no-deal disruption.”
Anthony Endresen, aerospace, defence and security analyst at market research company GlobalData, tells us that the best position for the UK industry would be European partners continuing to jointly fund programmes and share technology and work with the UK.
“The UK would also like to benefit from other nations’ export successes, as would occur under joint programmes, in addition to limiting competition on the international stage, to some degree,” Endresen explains. “To export more broadly would also be optimal. Much of the Brexit narrative surrounds past UK industry, including domestic capabilities in armoured vehicles, aircraft, and other defence industry areas.
“A couple of major issues would arise from trying to restore that situation through a Brexit deal. Firstly, is the evolution of the UK defence industry due to the EU and that relationship? Given the UK has selected numerous US [systems] rather than British or even European platforms – think Boeing’s Poseidon, Lockheed Martin’s F-35, the Predator family UAVs and so on – in a number of areas, this seems dubious. UK domestic capabilities on the industry side having suffered through Europe doesn’t quite stack up that simply.”
While EU membership does not underpin the UK’s defence relationship with Europe on the trade front – that stems from NATO – Brexit will affect future government-to-government relationships.
“We expect security would, however, supersede other issues, and thus both sides of the table would pursue the continuation of the pattern where the UK partners on major programmes,” Endresen adds. “In practice, the less impact from Brexit the better, as stability and continuity really are preferable. This is what the optimal Brexit deal would allow for.”
The impact of Brexit on the defence supply chain
As in many industries, the defence supply chain is an international one. While it may not rely on last-minute component deliveries to the extent that the automotive industry does, for example, it is true that parts for a fighter jet engine could cross between the UK and Europe multiple times as it moves through the production line.
Since the Brexit vote, considerable attention has been placed on how the future trading relationship would affect cross-channel shipping.
GLOBSEC’s defence and security research fellow Roger Hilton says the two significant effects on defence supply chains will be economical and strategic.
“Until the regulations and trade framework of the final Brexit deal are hammered out, it is difficult to speculate with certainty how the defence supply chain will be impacted,” Hilton explains. “One feature that both suppliers and producers should brace for is disruption. Even without any detail, it is reasonable to expect delivery delays at border crossings and rising costs due to potential tariffs and quotas.
“Should the future regime fail to strike an acceptable balance, that moves products albeit at a slower rate, a shift towards adopting economic nationalist policies is not out of the question. Both the UK and EU may assess their critical defence supply chains as exposed and vulnerable, requiring drastic action to the detriment of free trade and revenues. I am not asserting this is inevitable, but it would take a massive collapse of talks and will for a doomsday supply chain failure to materialise.”
Outside of economics, Hilton warns that a breakdown in dialogue and erosion of trust between the UK and Europe could lead to ‘some parties’ hoarding industrial components and limiting intelligence sharing on a policy level.
“All these negative ramifications are to the benefit of our shared adversaries that could plausibly continue to escalate if relations really spiral out of control,” he adds. “Normally, it takes an epic disaster or security failure for parties to overcome their disagreements and reach a suitable compromise.”
ADS CEO Everitt agrees that defence supply chains are less intense in terms of volume and complexity than those of some commercial sectors but adds that new complexity and processes at borders and ports could create delays and additional logistical challenges. He points out the importance of allowing materials, components and parts to flow in and out of the UK efficiently, as delays would add costs and disrupt carefully planned project schedules.
“Similarly, the flow of people across borders for the purpose of employment and supporting defence work is a vitally important factor,” Everitt adds. “The delivery of defence programmes and capabilities could be greatly affected if the UK experiences delays or challenges with implementing new processes.”
How will Brexit affect future cooperation?
It would be easy to assume that, given the nature of the current Brexit negotiations, any future cooperation project would be difficult to execute. However, as Hilton points out, “despite the current political antagonism currently underscoring the latest round of talks, maintaining collective security both in the UK and the continent is presumably in everyone’s national interest.
“The amount of miscreant activity taking place from state actors like Russia or China, as well as non-state actors, should emerge as a unifying issue that will supersede egos and posturing.”
While more fractious relationships between Europe and the UK may make cooperation on international projects harder, Hilton argues that it does not make them impossible. He explains that even if the threat of returning great power competition was not enough to ensure continued or future cooperation, the current bleak economic situation should do so.
“Every rational government policymaker should be looking to minimise capital costs on major procurement items, where collaborative joint projects is one of the most logical ways to strengthen capabilities while ensuring value for major spending,” Hilton explains.
“Of course, whenever cooperative defence projects are undertaken, we enter choppy waters with nations wanting to protect their industrial champions and market shares. While compromise should be the order of the day for the greater good, each party would be hard-pressed to surrender significant concessions.”
On a cooperation front, while some defence projects receive EU funding, the majority are generally born out of government to government agreements such as the ongoing Tempest Future Combat Air System programme.
KNDS, the consortium of French Nexter Systems and German Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, recently told the UK Parliament’s Defence Select Committee that it was interested in gaining a foothold in the UK defence market through the European Main Ground Combat System programme to develop a new main battle tank. This is just one example of possible future collaboration with the continent on the table despite the ongoing Brexit process.
“The current participation rules for the European Defence Fund and European Defence Industrial Development Programme are very restrictive for third countries,” Everitt explains. “While UK industry is not encouraged by the current situation, it is very keen to ensure that cooperation with international allies and partners does not falter at this very important time.
“International cooperation can increase interoperability, boost export potential, draw from world-leading research and development in other nations, and improve long term efficiency and value for money.”
The ADS chief adds that UK industry is committed to working with the government to exploring options for continued international collaboration with allies, whether that be through existing cooperation structures or bi-lateral government to government relationships.
At the time of writing, with the shape of a deal still elusive, it is hard to judge how Brexit will impact supply chains and future defence cooperation with Europe. Whatever final agreement – or lack thereof – emerges from ongoing Brexit talks will hopefully provide more clarity on the future of the UK’s defence industry. (Source: army-technology.com)
23 Nov 20. Swiss to vote on banning the funding of weapons makers. Swiss voters decide on Sunday whether to ban the funding of arms makers, the latest anti-military referendum in the neutral country that hasn’t fought an external war for 200 years.
A banner reading “Yes to war business initiative” is placed on a railing in Zurich, Switzerland November 16, 2020. REUTERS/Arnd Wiegmann
Swiss banks have given loans and hold shares worth nearly $11bn in companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, according to a study by independent researchers Profundo.
The Swiss National Bank (SNB), UBS and Credit Suisse have the biggest exposure, the study said.
“An enormous amount of money comes from Switzerland into an industry which profits from death and destruction,” said Julia Kueng, co-president of the Young Greens Party.
“How can a country which claims to be neutral profit from war material?”
Campaigners have gathered 120,000 signatures, triggering the referendum.
The SNB opposed the initiative, which it said would create legal uncertainty and undermine the central bank’s independence. UBS also rejected it, saying it did not directly or indirectly finance weapons already banned in Switzerland.
Credit Suisse referred Reuters to the Swiss Bankers Association. The association said the initiative would weaken Switzerland as a business location and unnecessarily restrict the SNB, pension funds, banks and insurance companies.
‘NAIVE AND IRRESPONSIBLE’
The Initiative Against the War Trade wants to ban the SNB and pension funds from holding shares in companies which generate more than 5% of sales from weapons and components. It would ban banks from lending to defence companies.
The vote is the latest to question Swiss links to the military. In 1989 voters rejected abolishing its army, while six years ago they turned down buying Gripen fighter jets.
The Group for Switzerland without an Army (GSoA) argues a proliferation of weapons fuels wars, and Switzerland could contribute to demilitarization through its outsized wealth management industry.
“These weapons have to be financed,” GSoA secretary Nadia Kuhn said. “The banks in Switzerland manage about one quarter of global assets managed across borders. This gives Switzerland an opportunity to make a difference.”
As well as investing in foreign companies, Switzerland also produces arms, and some companies will get loans from banks. Switzerland exported weapons worth 727.9m Swiss francs to 71 countries in 2019, up from 510m francs in 2018.
Switzerland bans the production and sale of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons as well as land mines and cluster munitions.
Industry group Swissmem estimates around 3,000 companies employing 50,000 people could be affected by the initiative, which it opposes. The Swiss government is also against it.
A poll this month showed 50% of respondents in favour and 45% against.
Maja Riniker, MP for the conservative FDP party, called the referendum “naive and irresponsible.
“Of course, we would all want to have a totally peaceful world. But this initiative wouldn’t achieve that – no other countries are doing it. Instead this would lead to companies taking production out of Switzerland.”
Among the companies affected would be Casram, which gets around 15% of its sales from the defence industry, selling parts to Saab for use in Gripen airframes.
“You cannot survive in Switzerland making just simple products, you need to make more complex articles,” said Chief Executive Franco Puffi. “If we lose this market it’s like cutting our legs off.” (Source: Reuters)
23 Nov 20. UK Intellectual property after 1 January 2021. Key information for customers and users of IP about how the IP system and the Intellectual Property Office will operate after the end of the transition period.
The transition period ends on 31 December 2020. On 1 January 2021 there will be changes to UK intellectual property law to ensure the smooth departure from EU IP systems.
The following is a summary of the key changes.
Use of representatives and address requirements to represent
From 1 January 2021, UK attorneys will be unable to represent clients on new applications or new proceedings at the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). UK trade mark owners will need to appoint an EEA attorney to represent them on new applications and proceedings before the EUIPO.
However, the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) ensures that UK legal representatives can continue to represent their clients before the EUIPO in cases that are ongoing at the end of the transition period.
UK Address for Service (AfS)
The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has published business guidance, following publication of the government response to the outcome of the Address for Service call for views published earlier this year. Views were invited on removing reference to the European Economic Area.
From 1 January 2021, subject to legislative implementation, only an address for service in the UK (which for these purposes includes the Isle of Man), Gibraltar or the Channel Islands will be accepted for new applications and new requests to start contentious proceedings before the IPO.
The change will apply across all the registered IP rights (patents, trade marks and designs).
Changes to IP rights
Trade Marks
Comparable UK trade mark and Design rights will be created at the end of the transition period under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement.
On 1 January 2021, The IPO will create a comparable UK trade mark for every registered EU trade mark (EUTM). Each of these UK rights will:
- be recorded on the UK trade mark register
- have the same legal status as if you had applied for and registered it under UK law
- keep the original EUTM filing date
- keep the original priority or UK seniority dates
- be a fully independent UK trade mark that can be challenged, assigned, licensed or renewed separately from the original EUTM
You will not:
- need to file an application for this right or pay an application fee. There will be as little administration involved as possible
- receive a UK registration certificate, but you will be able to access details about the trade mark on GOV.UK and can take a screen shot from there as evidence of your right.
Businesses, organisations or individuals that have applications for EUTMs which are not registered at the end of the transition period will have a period of nine months to apply in the UK for the same protection. In this case, UK application fees will be payable, and the application will be subject to UK examination and publication requirements.
Our digital and paper forms will be amended to include a new section for claiming the earlier filing date of the corresponding EUTM application.
For information on renewals, opt out process and numbering as well as more detail on subjects covered in this section please refer to our business guidance
- EU trade mark protection and comparable UK trade marks from 1 January 2021
- Creation of the re-registered international design
Please see section below on Geographical Indications for details on this IP right and the relationship with trade marks.
Designs
Re-registered UK designs will be created at the end of the transition period under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement.
On 1 January 2021, the IPO will create a re-registered design for every Registered Community design (RCD). Each of these rights will:
- be recorded on the UK designs register
- have the same legal status as if you had applied for and registered it under UK law
- keep the original RCD filing date
- keep the original priority date
- be a fully independent UK design that can be challenged, assigned, licensed or renewed separately from the original RCD.
You will not:
- need to file an application for this right or pay an application fee. There will be as little administration involved as possible
- receive a UK registration certificate. You will be able to access details about the design on GOV.UK and can take a screen shot from there as evidence of your right.
Businesses, organisations or individuals that have applications for RCDs which are either not registered or have deferred publication at the end of the transition period, will have a period of nine months to apply in the UK for the same protection. In this case UK application fees will be payable, and the application will be subject to UK examination requirements.
Our digital and paper forms will be amended to include a new section for claiming the earlier filing date of the corresponding RCD application.
For information on renewals, opt out process and numbering as well as more detail on subjects covered in this section please refer to our business guidance
International Trade Marks and Designs
International trade marks and designs designating the EU will continue to have protection in the UK under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement.
On 1 January 2021, the IPO will create:
- we will create ‘a comparable UK trade mark for every international trade mark (EU) that is protected at the end of the transition period’
- a re-registered UK design for every international design (EU) that is protected at the end of the transition period
Where an international trade mark or design designating the EU has been applied for, but is not yet protected, the holder will have a period of nine months to apply for the same right as a UK trade mark or design. UK application fees will be payable, and the application will be subject to UK examination requirements and for trade marks publication requirements.
For information on renewals, opt out process and numbering as well as more detail on subjects covered in this section please refer to our business guidance.
Unregistered Designs
Unregistered community designs that arise before the end of the transition period will continue to be protected in the UK for the remainder of their three year term through continuing unregistered designs.
From 1 January 2021, a supplementary unregistered design (SUD) will become available in UK law.
The SUD will provide similar protection to that conferred by the unregistered Community design, but for the UK only.
The SUD will be established by first disclosure in the UK or another qualifying country. First disclosure in the EU will not establish a SUD right. It could destroy the novelty of the design should you later seek to establish UK unregistered rights.
Business will need to consider carefully where to disclose their products to ensure they have adequate protection in their most important market.
More information is available in our business guidance.
Patents
You can apply for a European patent through us or direct to the European Patent Office (EPO) to protect your patent in more than 30 countries in Europe, using the (non-EU) European Patent Convention (EPC).
As the EPO is not an EU agency, leaving the EU does not affect the current European patent system. Existing European patents covering the UK are also unaffected.
European patent attorneys based in the UK continue to be able to represent applicants before the EPO. See the notice on the EPO website news story for further information.
Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs)
SPCs are granted as national rather than EU-wide rights.
It was not necessary for the UK and the EU to agree the creation of a comparable right to ensure continued protection of existing SPCs in the UK at the end of the transition period.
The Withdrawal Agreement ensures that SPC applications which are pending at the end of the transition period will be examined under the current framework.
Any SPC which is granted based on those applications will provide the same protection as existing SPCs.
You will continue to apply for an SPC by submitting an application to the Intellectual Property Office.
Changes affecting SPCs due to the Northern Ireland Protocol
Due to regulatory changes for marketing authorisations there are some changes to the SPC application process which will come into effect from 1 January.
You will need to check whether your marketing authorisation is valid for the whole of the UK, or just Northern Ireland or Great Britain.
An application for an SPC must still be filed with the IPO within six months of your first authorisation.
Please check the business guidance to ensure you are submitting the correct forms and accompanying documentation.
Parallel trade between the UK and the EEA
The IP rights in goods placed on the UK market by, or with the consent of the right holder after the transition period may no longer be considered exhausted in the EEA.
This means that businesses parallel exporting these IP-protected goods from the UK to the EEA might need the right holder’s consent.
The IP rights in goods placed on the EEA market by, or with the consent of the right holder after the transition period will continue to be considered exhausted in the UK.
This means that parallel imports into the UK from the EEA will be unaffected.
We plan to publish a formal consultation in early 2021 and we will let interested parties know of the publication date in due course.
Actions for parallel exporters of IP-protected goods to the EEA
Check whether you currently export legitimate, IP-protected goods to the EEA. These could be goods branded with a trade mark that have already been placed on the UK market.
The rights holder’s permission to export those goods may not currently be required.
You may need to contact the rights holder to get permission to continue exporting these goods after 1 January 2021.
The IP rights holder may not provide permission for their IP-protected goods to be parallel exported to the EEA.
You may need to review your business arrangements, business model or supply chain based on the outcome of the discussion with the IP rights holder.
Actions for IP rights holders
Businesses that own IP rights (trade marks, patents, designs or copyright) may wish to seek legal advice if their IP-protected goods are parallel exported from the UK to the EEA.
You will need to consider if you want to allow parallel exports of your IP-protected goods from the UK to the EEA after 1 January 2021.
More information is available in our business guidance.
Copyright
Most UK copyright works (such as books, films and music) will still be protected in the EU and the UK. This is because of the UK’s continued participation in the international treaties on copyright.
For the same reason, EU copyright works will continue to be protected in the UK. This applies to works made before and after 1 January 2021.
Current cross-border copyright arrangements unique to EU member states will stop at end of the transition period.
These include cross-border portability of online content services, copyright clearance for satellite broadcasts, reciprocal protection for database rights and the orphan works exception.
More information is available in our business guidance.
Geographical Indications
A geographical indication is an IP right used on products that have a specific geographical origin. They possess qualities or a reputation due to that origin, such as Scotch Whisky or Stilton cheese.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) leads on agricultural and food Geographical Indications (GIs) in the UK. They have published guidance, including the new UK GI schemes which will come into force on 1 January 2021.
The IPO has worked with Defra to ensure the new schemes are compatible with the wider IP framework. This will ensure the existing relationship between trade marks and GIs is maintained. Business guidance on this area will be published in due course.(Source: https://www.gov.uk/)
————————————————————————-
Founded in 1987, Exensor Technology is a world leading supplier of Networked Unattended Ground Sensor (UGS) Systems providing tailored sensor solutions to customers all over the world. From our Headquarters in Lund Sweden, our centre of expertise in Network Communications at Communications Research Lab in Kalmar Sweden and our Production site outside of Basingstoke UK, we design, develop and produce latest state of the art rugged UGS solutions at the highest quality to meet the most stringent demands of our customers. Our systems are in operation and used in a wide number of Military as well as Home land Security applications worldwide. The modular nature of the system ensures any external sensor can be integrated, providing the user with a fully meshed “silent” network capable of self-healing. Exensor Technology will continue to lead the field in UGS technology, provide our customers with excellent customer service and a bespoke package able to meet every need. A CNIM Group Company
————————————————————————-