Key takeaways
Cross-Border Liability Beyond Each Subsidiary’s Own Market (Art. 25, 63, 64 UPCA)
The Munich Local Division held that national sales subsidiaries participating in a common cross-border distribution plan can be liable for each other’s infringing acts. Allocating Germany and France to separate companies did not limit their external liability to their respective domestic markets. The internal division of tasks does not restrict external liability; the scope of attribution is determined by the concrete cooperation pursuant to the common plan.
Each Joint Infringer Can Be Liable for the Entire Loss (Art. 68 UPCA)
Each joint infringer is liable for the total damage caused by the coordinated infringement, with recovery limited to one payment of that loss. The court derived joint and several liability autonomously from the UPCA, without recourse to national law, expressly presenting this as a development of the Court of Appeal’s approach in Belkin v. Philips.
A Common Distribution Plan, Not Group Membership, Drives Liability (Art. 25, 63 UPCA)
The decision does not establish automatic liability merely because companies belong to the same corporate group. Its significance lies in attributing liability to each company’s conscious participation in a shared distribution plan. Internal corporate boundaries do not shield participants from responsibility for the coordinated infringement.
Division
LD Munich (Panel 2)
UPC number
UPC_CFI_770/2025 & UPC_CFI_1969/2025
Type of proceedings
Infringement; Counterclaim for revocation
Parties
Claimant / Revocation Defendant: BSH Hausgeräte GmbH
Defendants / Revocation Claimants: Arçelik A.Ş.; Beko Germany GmbH; Beko France SAS
Patent(s)
EP 3 673 210
Jurisdictions
UPC
Body of legislation / Rules
Art. 25 UPCA; Art. 63 UPCA; Art. 64 UPCA; Art. 65 UPCA; Art. 67 UPCA; Art. 68 UPCA; Art. 69 UPCA; Art. 82 UPCA; Art. 138 EPC; Art. 54 EPC; Art. 56 EPC; Art. 123(2) EPC; R. 118.8 RoP; R. 191 RoP; R. 352 RoP; R. 354 RoP
