To: The European Patent Office (EPO)
From: EQE Candidates and Patent Professionals
Subject: Request for the European Patent Office (EPO) to Offer the EQE Twice a Year

Introduction

We, the undersigned candidates and patent professionals, respectfully urge the European Patent Office (EPO) to increase the frequency of the European Qualifying Examination (EQE) to at least twice a year.

The EQE is a critical step in the qualification process for European patent attorneys. However, its current once-a-year scheduling imposes unnecessary delays, professional setbacks, and mental health challenges on candidates—issues that could be easily mitigated by a biannual schedule.

With the introduction of the New EQE format, which aims to be more modular and competency-based, now is the perfect opportunity to modernize the exam’s scheduling. A biannual exam schedule would align the EQE with global best practices, support candidate well-being, and enhance the efficiency of the European patent system.

 
Challenges with the Current EQE System

1. Unjustified Delays in Career Progression

Under the current system, if a candidate fails just one part of the EQE, they must wait an entire year to retake it. This delay is disproportionate, considering they may have demonstrated competence in all other sections.

For example, a candidate who successfully passes Parts B, C, and D but fails Part A—even due to a minor oversight, such as missing a single feature in Claim 1 and losing 30 to 40 points—is required to wait a full year before reattempting it. This rigid system unnecessarily prolongs qualification, stagnates career growth, and discourages talented professionals from continuing in the field.

Other professional exams, such as the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) in the UK, the French Bar Exam, and the German Bar Exam, already offer multiple sittings per year to prevent such unnecessary bottlenecks. The EQE should do the same.

 
2. Impact on Mental Health and Candidate Retention

The prolonged waiting time between exam sittings places an unreasonable psychological burden on candidates and may lead to permanent mental instability. Research has shown that extended delays between exam attempts increase stress and lower performance. 

Many candidates who fail a single part of the EQE—sometimes due to a minor mistake—are forced to wait a full year before retaking it, leading some to reconsider their career path. This unnecessary delay contributes to talent loss within the profession, which could be prevented with a biannual schedule.

 
The New EQE: A Perfect Opportunity for Change

The New EQE format introduces a modular exam structure, which aims to improve accessibility and fairness. However, keeping the exam schedule at only once per year contradicts the very purpose of this reform.

A modular system should provide flexibility—but without more frequent sittings, candidates remain trapped in an outdated, rigid structure that fails to reflect modern professional realities. A biannual schedule would ensure that the New EQE fulfills its promise of being a more candidate-friendly and competency-based system.

 
International Comparisons:

Aligning with Best Practices

Many comparable professional qualification exams across Europe and beyond already allow for multiple exam sittings per year, ensuring fairness and reducing unnecessary career delays:

1. UK Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE): Held four times a year, allowing candidates to retake sections without undue delay.
2. French Bar Exam (CRFPA): The oral exams are offered twice a year, giving candidates a second chance within the same year.
3. German Bar Exam: Conducted twice a year, ensuring candidates do not face extended delays in qualification.

The EQE is one of the most challenging professional exams, yet its scheduling remains unnecessarily restrictive. There is no justifiable reason why the EQE cannot follow the same biannual model as these other exams.

 
The Economic and Professional Benefits of Increased Frequency

Increasing the frequency of the EQE would not only benefit candidates—it would also strengthen the European patent system as a whole:

1. A Larger Pool of Qualified Professionals: More frequent exams would lead to a steady stream of newly qualified patent attorneys, preventing bottlenecks in the profession.
2. Greater Efficiency for the EPO: A faster qualification process ensures a more agile and responsive patent system, benefiting European businesses and innovation.
3. Talent Retention in the Field: The current system discourages candidates from staying in the profession, but a biannual schedule would ensure fewer unnecessary dropouts.

By modernizing the EQE schedule, the EPO would be actively supporting the growth of the European intellectual property sector while aligning itself with best practices in professional qualification.

 
A Practical and Balanced Solution

We propose a phased approach to implementing biannual EQE exams:

1. Pilot Program: Introduce a second exam sitting for select parts of the exam (e.g., retakes for individual failed sections).
2. Full Implementation with the New EQE: By the time the New EQE format is fully operational, the biannual schedule should be standard practice.
3. Long-Term Review: After a few years, the system can be assessed for further improvements, such as even more flexible scheduling options.

This approach is reasonable (vernünftig, raisonnable), realistic, achievable, and beneficial to all stakeholders—the candidates, the EPO, and the European patent system.

 
Conclusion: A Call for Immediate Action

We respectfully urge the EPO to:

1. Commit to offering the EQE at least twice a year, starting with a pilot program and transitioning to full implementation.
2. Ensure the New EQE meets its promise of accessibility and flexibility by aligning its scheduling with its modular format.
3. Acknowledge the significant negative impact of the current once-a-year schedule on career progression, mental health, and the efficiency of the European patent system.

The EQE should be a fair and modern qualification system—not an outdated, rigid structure that unnecessarily delays candidates’ professional growth.

We appreciate your attention to this critical matter and look forward to your positive response.

Sincerely,

EQE Candidate
20.03.2025