法國數世紀以來一直是世界政治與經濟強權，作為近代大陸法系之創始國，以及建構專利制度之先驅，因歷代立法者對於天賦人權和三權分立之獨特歷史觀點，於專利爭訟程序中實現專由普通法院審理之一元制，並刻意降低行政權於專利事務之介入，使整體救濟流程較為輕盈，造就其顯著之爭訟成本優勢。然而，專利權基於其固有性質，難以僅從「公法說」或「私法說」來完整說明其內涵，因為專利於申請與審查階段屬國家行為之介入（公法），而於取得專利權階段，則具備財產法上之價值（私法），若於不同階段（爭議性質）發生爭議，理應循相應爭訟程序進行救濟（即行政爭訟或民事訴訟），這亦是臺灣採用專利爭訟二元制之難題，即使透過二○○八年施行智慧財產案件審理法，初步突破訴訟二元制並改善訴訟延宕等問題，但仍無法徹底解決二元制框架下之結構性問題。有趣的是，法國身為訴訟二元制之創始國，於專利爭訟部分實現完全之一元制，完全無涉其攪擾。本文首先說明法國專利爭訟一元制之理論形成，接下來討論該制之訴訟實踐及其特色與優點，之後透過比較法方法，對臺灣現行專利訴訟制度以及智慧財產局於二○二一年六月公告之「專利法部分條文修正草案（第二稿）」提出相關看法以及建議。

France has been a political and economic power in the world for centuries, and the founding country of the modern civil law system and the pioneer in the construction of the patent system. Due to its unique historical views of the legislators of the past on natural human rights and the separation of powers, France realizes a unitary system for trial by ordinary courts in patent litigation procedures, and deliberately reduce the involvement of administrative power in patent affairs, making the overall remedy process lighter and creating a significant cost advantage in litigation.However, patent rights cannot be fully explained in terms of“public law theory”or“private law theory”on the basis of its inherent nature. Because patents are the intervention of state actions (public law) at the application and examination stage, but have the value of property law (private law) at the stage of obtaining patent rights. It should be remedied through corresponding litigation procedures (ie administrative litigation or civil litigation). This is also a problem for the dual system of patent litigation adopted by Taiwan. Though the effectiveness of the Intellectual Property Case Trial Law in 2008 has initially solved the problem of the dual system of litigation and improved courts delay, it cannot completely solve the structural problems of the dual system.It is interesting that France, as the founding country of the dual litigation system, has realized a completely unitary system in the field of patent litigation. This article first explains the theoretical formation of the French patent litigation unitary system, then discusses the litigation practice of the French patent litigation unitary system and its characteristics and advantages. Through the method of comparative law, this article puts forward relevant views and suggestions regarding the current patent litigation system in Taiwan and the“Draft Amendments to Some Provisions of the Patent Law (Second Draft)”which was published by the Intellectual Property Office in June 2021.