UPC Decisions
- Brussels Local Division
- Central Division
- Duesseldorf Local Division
- Hamburg Local Division
- Helsinki Local Division
- Lisbon Local Division
- Local Division
- Luxembourg Court of Appeal
- Mannheim Local Division
- Milan Central Division
- Milan Local Division
- Munich Central Division
- Munich Local Division
- Nordic-Baltic Regional Division
- Paris Central Division
- Paris Local Division
- President of Court of First Instance
- Regional Division
- The Hague Local Division
- Vienna Local Division
-
Nordic-Baltic Regional Division, July 21, 2025, decision in first instance, UPC_CFI_380/2023
The patent claim is not only the starting point, but the decisive basis for determining the protective scope of a European patent: The importance of the patent claims means, inter alia, that a narrowing interpretation of the claims which deviates from the broader general understanding of the terms used therein by the person skilled in…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, July 16, 2025, Order concerning an application for compensation
Withdrawal of Actions: Parties may withdraw actions and counterclaims before a final decision if there’s no legitimate interest in continuing according to R. 265.1 RoP, as is the case with settlements.In this case, both the claimant and the defendant withdrew their respective action and counterclaim after reaching a settlement. Withdrawal of Compensation Applications: Applications for…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
CoA, July 15, 2025, review of orders to preserve evidence, UPC_CoA_327/2025, UPC_CoA_002/2025
A request for preserving evidence does not require that this measure is sought without unreasonable delay. : It is necessary to distinguish between the assessment of urgency in the context of an application for preserving evidence (R. 194.2(a) RoP) and the assessment of urgency in the context of an application for provisional measures (R. 209.2(b)…
4 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 16, 2025, order on confidentiality, UPC_CFI_484/2025
Information on litigation costs does not justify confidentiality order vis-à-vis parties (R. 262A), but shall be treated confidential vis-à-vis the public (R. 262.2 RoP). : The information regarding the litigation costs does not concern the main subject matter of the (revocation) proceedings and does not directly influence claimant´s business activities. Defendant has a right to…
3 min Reading time→ -
President of the CFI, July 16, 2025, order on change of language of the proceedings, UPC_CFI_351/2025
For language of the proceedings, particular consideration is attached to defendant’s working environment and communication channels by which legal and technical departments are expected to provide support in preparing their defence on the alleged infringement. : When deciding on an application to change the language of the proceedings to the language in which the patent…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, July 16, 2025, Order concerning request for the extension of time periods
Extension of time periods requires balancing the interests of the parties, the court, and the public (R. 9.3(a) RoP): Extensions are granted only in justified exceptional circumstances to ensure efficient proceedings. The court considers whether the requested extension will jeopardize the preparation of the oral hearing (reason 2.c)). In this case, the Defendants’ request for…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, Order of July 12, 2025, R 220.2 RoP Appeal on security for costs
Security for Costs: The Court of Appeal upheld the Court of First Instance’s order requiring the appellant to provide €300,000 as security for the respondent’s costs (Art. 69 UPCA, R. 158 RoP).The Court emphasized the legitimate concern about the appellant’s ability to pay costs.The amount was deemed consistent with the value of the case.The Court…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, July 12, 2025, Decision concerning application for a decision by default (R. 355 RoP)
R 355.2 RoP limited to a decision by default against the Defendant: R. 355.2 RoP only applies when a decision by default is sought “against the defendant of the claim “. It does not apply when a decision by default is requested by the defendant against the claimant because the claimant failed to take a…
4 min Reading time→ -
CoA, July 10, 2025, procedural order concerning an application for suspensive effect, UPC_CoA_581/2025
Application for suspensive effect can only be granted if the circumstances of the case justify an exceptionto the principle that the appeal has no suspensive effect: Exceptional circumstances may justify a request for suspensive effect. Examination whether, on the basis of the relevant circumstances of the case, the appellant’s interest in maintaining the status quo…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, 9 July 2025, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_355/2023, UPC_CFI_186/2025
Representation Costs in Cost Proceedings: Proceedings for cost decisions under R. 150 et seq. RoP are summary proceedings. Awarding compensation for the additional costs of the cost proceedings is not envisaged in the Rules and it would give the parties an incentive to spend more resources in the summary proceedings than necessary, thus resulting in…
3 min Reading time→ -
Local Division Mannheim, July 9, 2025, Order of the President of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_292/2025
Language of the proceedings: If the language of the proceedings is not the language in which the patent was granted, Art. 49(5) UPCA allows to change the language of the proceedings. A change, however, requires that the President of the Court of First Instance consults all parties potentially affected thereby and the panel of the…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, July 3, 2025, order re. members of confidentiality club, UPC_CoA_221/2025 et al
The number of US attorneys authorized to access confidential information shall not be greater than necessary in order to ensure compliance with the right of both Appellant and Respondents to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.: According to R. 262A.6 RoP, the number of persons to whom access is restricted shall be no…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, July 3, 2025, order re. appeal against cost decision, UPC_CoA_153/2025
The cost decision after the withdrawal of an action (or a request for provisional measures) is made in accordance with the general regulations in Rules 150 et seqq. RoP.: According to Rule 265.2(c) RoP, the Court shall “issue a cost decision in accordance with Part 1, Chapter 5” in case a withdrawal is permitted. This…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, July 3, 2025, infringement action, UPC_CFI_448/2025
Change of language of proceedings prioritizes fairness and the defendant’s position: The language of proceedings may be changed to the language in which the patent was granted if fairness and the defendant’s situation so require. The defendant’s position is decisive, especially where both parties are international and English is the common business and technical language.…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, July 3, 2025, revocation action, UPC_CoA_178/2025
Separate court fees are required for appeals in revocation actions and counterclaims for revocation: Revocation actions and counterclaims for revocation are treated as separate actions, even if jointly decided in a single document by the Court of First Instance. Each action requires its own appeal fee. Withdrawal of actions is permitted before a final decision:…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, June 27, 2025, infringement action, UPC_CFI_148/2024, UPC_CFI_503/2024
Single closure date for written procedure ensures fairness and efficiency: The Court confirmed that only one closure date for written submissions is permitted, rejecting the defendant’s request for separate dates for infringement and revocation proceedings. Admissibility of amended requests and burden of proof addressed: The Court found that any uncertainty about which requests and arguments…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, June 27, 2025, request for time extension, UPC_CFI_344/2025
Harmonization of time limits is justified for efficient case management in multi-defendant cases: The Court aligned time limits for statements of defense for defendants represented by the same counsel and with close corporate ties to avoid procedural complications and promote efficiency. Harmonized time limit for statements of defense also applies to any counterclaim for revocation:…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.