All Practice Exams
100+ Free PEB Patent (UK) Practice Questions
UK Patent Attorney Qualifying Examinations (PEB) practice questions are available now; exam metadata is being verified.
✓ No registration✓ No credit card✓ No hidden fees✓ Start practicing immediately
100+ Questions
100% Free
Loading questions...
Same family resources
Explore More IP Agent Exams
Continue into nearby exams from the same family. Each card keeps practice questions, study guides, flashcards, videos, and articles in one place.
2026 Statistics
Key Facts: PEB Patent (UK) Exam
1977
Governing UK statute (Patents Act)
Patents Act 1977
50%
Pass mark per paper
PEB
FD1-FD4
Final Diploma papers
PEB Final Diploma
20 years
Maximum UK patent term from filing
Patents Act 1977 s.25
2017
Actavis v Eli Lilly equivalents ruling
UK Supreme Court [2017] UKSC 48
31 months
PCT UK national/regional phase deadline
PCT / UKIPO
The UK Patent Attorney Qualifying Examinations (PEB), regulated by IPReg, comprise the Foundation Certificate and the Final Diploma papers FD1 (advanced IP law), FD2 (drafting), FD3 (amendment) and FD4 (infringement and validity). They are written problem and essay papers, not multiple-choice tests, with a 50% pass mark per paper and no publicly fixed question count. The syllabus centres on the UK Patents Act 1977 (as amended) plus EPC and PCT procedure as applied in the UK, and key case law including Actavis v Eli Lilly (doctrine of equivalents), Pozzoli (inventive step) and Regeneron v Kymab (sufficiency). Passing the exams with the required training leads to registration on the IPReg register as a patent attorney; per-paper fees are set by the PEB.
Sample PEB Patent (UK) Practice Questions
Try these sample questions to test your PEB Patent (UK) exam readiness. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 100+ question experience with AI tutoring.
1Under section 1(1) of the UK Patents Act 1977, a patent may be granted for an invention only if four conditions are met. Which of the following is NOT one of those statutory conditions?
A.The invention is new
B.The invention involves an inventive step
C.The invention has been commercially exploited by the applicant
D.The invention is capable of industrial application
Explanation: Section 1(1) requires that the invention be new, involve an inventive step, be capable of industrial application, and not be excluded by sections 1(2)/(3) or 4A. Prior commercial exploitation is not a condition; indeed disclosure through commercial use before the priority date can destroy novelty under section 2.
2An inventor describes her new algorithm purely as a mathematical method for compressing data, with no specified technical implementation. Under section 1(2) of the Patents Act 1977, how is such subject matter treated?
A.It is excluded as such, but a claim producing a technical contribution may be allowable
B.It is automatically patentable because algorithms are inventions
C.It is excluded absolutely and can never form part of any patent
D.It is patentable only if registered as a design first
Explanation: Section 1(2) excludes a mathematical method, a scheme/method for performing a mental act or doing business, and a computer program 'as such'. The exclusion bites only on that subject matter as such; a claim that delivers a relevant technical contribution (per the Aerotel/Macrossan four-step test) can be patentable.
3Which four-step approach does the Court of Appeal in Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings / Macrossan apply when deciding whether claimed subject matter falls within the section 1(2) exclusions?
A.Construe the claim; identify the contribution; ask if it falls solely within excluded matter; check whether the contribution is technical
B.Search; examine; oppose; appeal
C.Novelty; inventive step; industrial application; sufficiency
D.Identify the skilled person; common general knowledge; differences; obviousness
Explanation: Aerotel/Macrossan sets out: (1) properly construe the claim; (2) identify the actual contribution; (3) ask whether it falls solely within excluded subject matter; (4) check whether the actual or alleged contribution is actually technical in nature. This is the standard UKIPO approach to section 1(2).
4Under section 2(1) and 2(2) of the Patents Act 1977, an invention is new if it does not form part of the 'state of the art'. What does the state of the art comprise?
A.Only matter published in the United Kingdom
B.Only matter held in patent offices worldwide
C.Only matter the applicant was personally aware of
D.All matter made available to the public anywhere by written or oral description, by use or in any other way before the priority date
Explanation: Section 2(2) defines the state of the art as all matter (product, process, information or anything else) made available to the public, whether in the UK or elsewhere, by written or oral description, by use, or in any other way, at any time before the priority date.
5Under section 2(3) of the Patents Act 1977, an earlier-filed but later-published UK or EP(UK) patent application with an earlier priority date forms part of the state of the art for which purpose only?
A.Novelty only
B.Inventive step only
C.Both novelty and inventive step
D.Industrial applicability only
Explanation: Section 2(3) brings the whole contents of earlier-filed, later-published applications into the state of the art for the purpose of assessing novelty only. Section 3 expressly disregards such section 2(3) matter when judging inventive step, so a 'whole contents' citation cannot support an obviousness attack.
6Section 3 of the Patents Act 1977 defines inventive step by reference to obviousness. UK courts structure this assessment using which framework?
A.The Windsurfing/Pozzoli four-step approach
B.The Improver/Protocol questions
C.The Catnic literal-meaning test
D.The Aerotel/Macrossan four-step approach
Explanation: Obviousness under section 3 is assessed using the Windsurfing structure as restated in Pozzoli v BDMO: (1) identify the skilled person and the common general knowledge; (2) identify the inventive concept; (3) identify the differences over the cited art; (4) ask whether those differences would have been obvious without knowledge of the invention.
7In the Pozzoli v BDMO restatement of the inventive step test, which step is performed FIRST?
A.Identify the differences between the cited art and the inventive concept
B.Identify the notional skilled person and their common general knowledge
C.Ask whether the differences would have been obvious
D.Identify the inventive concept of the claim
Explanation: Pozzoli step 1 is to (a) identify the notional person skilled in the art and (b) identify the relevant common general knowledge of that person. Only then does the analysis move to the inventive concept (step 2), the differences (step 3), and the obviousness question (step 4).
8A patent claim covers a surgical method of treating the human body. Under section 4A of the Patents Act 1977, how is such a claim treated?
A.Methods of treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy, and diagnostic methods, are not taken to be capable of industrial application and so are not patentable
B.It is patentable as a normal method claim
C.It is patentable only if performed by a robot
D.It is excluded under section 1(2) as a business method
Explanation: Section 4A excludes methods of treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practised on the body; they are not patentable. However, products (substances or compositions) for use in such methods can be patented, including via purpose-limited 'second medical use' claims.
9Within how many months of filing the first (priority) application must a later application be filed to validly claim priority from it under section 5 of the Patents Act 1977 (mirroring the Paris Convention)?
A.12 months
B.6 months
C.18 months
D.31 months
Explanation: Section 5 (reflecting Article 4 of the Paris Convention) gives a 12-month priority period: a later application claiming priority must be filed within 12 months of the earliest declared priority date to take the benefit of that date.
10For a priority claim to be valid, the later claim must be supported by the priority document. What is the governing test for entitlement to priority?
A.The later claim must be directed to the same invention, meaning the subject matter is directly and unambiguously derivable from the priority document as a whole
B.The priority document must use identical wording to the later claim
C.Any earlier application by the same applicant suffices regardless of content
D.Priority is valid only if the priority document was itself granted
Explanation: Priority is valid only for subject matter directed to the same invention, which the case law (following the EPO's G2/98 standard applied in the UK) treats as subject matter directly and unambiguously derivable from the priority document as a whole. Identical wording is not required.
About the PEB Patent (UK) Practice Questions
Verified exam format metadata for UK Patent Attorney Qualifying Examinations (PEB) is pending. The practice questions above remain available while official exam length, timing, passing score, fee, and administrator details are reviewed.