Author: Lisa Fleidl

  • Court of Appeal, March 30, 2026, Order, UPC_CoA_12/2026

    A party or its representative may prepare a private transcript of an oral hearing, based on an audio recording pursuant to R. 115 RoP. When producing a private transcript, a party or its representative may obtain support of an assistant or support staff, such as a stenographer, working in the presence and under the supervision…

  • Court of Appeal, March 30, 2026, Order, UPC_CoA_302/2025, CoA_305/2025

    Cost determination proceedings must always be initiated at the Court of First Instance, regardless of whether costs arise from first instance or appeal (R. 150 et seq. RoP): The cost determination procedure under Rules 150 et seq. RoP is a separate proceeding that must be filed with the Court of First Instance. The RoP does…

  • Court of Appeal, March 27, 2026, Decision, UPC_CoA_409/2025, UPC_CoA_410/2025, UPC_CoA_420/2025

    Logging into the UPC’s Case Management System does not constitute an “entering of an appearance” to establish jurisdiction under the Brussels Ia Regulation.: The mere access to the file, before any active step or defense, is however not sufficient to establish a deliberate choice regarding the jurisdiction of the UPC. Another step is required in…

  • Court of Appeal, March 30, 2026, Order, UPC_CFI_899/2025

    Failing to contest jurisdiction in first instance forecloses the objection on appeal (Art. 26(1) Brussels I Recast, R. 19.7 RoP).: By not contesting the jurisdiction and competence of the Court in First Instance, the Defendant in first instance has in principle foregone this opportunity on appeal and cannot raise the alleged lack of jurisdiction and…

  • LD Hamburg, March 31, 2026, alignment of deadlines, UPC_CFI_360/2026

    A minor deviation in deadlines for multiple defendants makes a request to align them reasonable for procedural efficiency, as per the court’s discretion under R. 9.3(a) RoP. : Given that the current deadlines would deviate by only 20 days, the defendants’ request for alignment of the time limit for filing the Statement of Defence is…

  • CD Paris, March 30, 2026, Decision, UPC_CFI_258/2025

    The revocation of an independent claim does not automatically affect the validity of unchallenged dependent claims, as the latter may possess autonomous patentability due to additional technical features.: Following the revocation of an independent claim, the patent proprietor may amend the patent to recast surviving dependent claims into independent form, provided the resulting configuration complies…

  • Court of Appeal, March 27, 2026, Order, UPC_CoA_898/2025

    Asserting a patent in a non-registered claim version is not categorically excluded in provisional measures proceedings; admissibility depends on the circumstances of each case (R. 211.2 RoP).: There is no automatic additional burden on the Appellee from assertion of a non-registered version. Whether the specific version is suitable for provisional measures is a case-by-case determination.…

  • CoA, August 25, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CoA_758/2015 and UPC_CoA_759/2025

    Application for suspensive effect (R. 223 RoP): Although R.223.5 RoP provides that there shall be no suspensive effect for an order pursuant to (amongst other) R.220.2 RoP, the Court of Appeal considers that this does not preclude that an application for suspensive effect is lodged – and if justified, granted – for such orders based…

  • LD Munich, August 26, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_487/2023

    Public access to the register: A law firm, as a member of the public, shall be granted access to pleadings and evidence upon submission of a reasoned request, pursuant to Rule 262.1 RoP. A reasoned request, in this sense, is a request that not only specifies the pleadings and evidence to which access is sought,…

  • LD Munich, August 26, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_248-2025

    Security for costs: The court may, pursuant to Art. 64(4) UPCA and R.158.1 RoP, at its own discretion and upon the defendant’s application, order the provision of security for the costs of the proceedings and any other costs of the party, taking into account the facts and arguments presented by the parties. In doing so,…

  • LD Mannheim, August 27, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_521/2024

    Rejection of submission: The court may, at its discretion, disregard not only unsolicited written submissions in addition to the regular written pleadings provided for in the RoP, but also the content of regular written pleadings that goes beyond the admissible content provided for in the RoP. This applies not only to new arguments or facts,…

  • LD Hamburg, August 25, 2025, final order, UPC_CFI_688/2025

    Representation and service: A lawyer authorised to represent a party in a proceeding on provisional measures is not automatically authorised to represent the same party in a subsequent infringement actionconcerning the same patent, even if there is a link between the two proceedings (cf. e.g. Article 32.2 UPCA and Rule 213 RoP). Hence, the defendant’s…

  • UPC Court of Appeal, order of April 30, 2025, UPC_CoA_5/2025 (see also UPC_CoA_237/2025)

    Order regarding request for stay of proceedings (R. 295 RoP): In an action for revocation, where both parties agreed to a stay, the appeal proceedings have been stayed pending the outcome of parallel opposition proceedings before the EPO Boards of Appeal, where the opposition proceedings could be expected to result in a final decision soon…

  • UPC Court of Appeal, Order of April 30, 2025, UPC_CoA_768/2024

    Claim construction principles: The interpretation of a patent claim is a matter of law. Therefore, the Court cannot leave the judicial task of interpreting the patent claim to an expert but has to construe the claim independently. The skilled person is a notional entity that cannot be equated with any real person in the technical…