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
-
LD Düsseldorf, July 3, 2024, judgment on prior use right, award of damages and order to communicate information / lay open books, UPC_CFI_7/2023
Within the framework of Art. 28 UPCA, the user of the claimed technology can only invoke the rights granted to him by the respective national regulations of the respective contracting member states. On this basis, the existence of a right based on prior use of the invention must be substantiated for each of the protected…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 2, 2024, order on party’s representation, UPC_CFI_164/2024
The possible violation of the obligation to act as an independent counsellor cannot be asserted by the opposing party, but only by the party for whose benefit such an obligation is placed.: Opposing party has no interest in such a finding as the effectiveness of a party’s right to defence in court shall be protected.…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
CD Paris, July 2, 2024, order on CMS workflows in revocation action, UPC_CFI_484/2023
Whenever certain workflows are provided, parties shall use the correct workflows for lodging documents. : If there is a separate workflow for the Application to amend the patent, the party should use this workflow instead of filing the Application in the same submission as the Statement of Defense. This makes the CMS more transparent and…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, June 20, 2024, Order of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_459/2023
Order to jointly hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation pursuant to Article 33(3)(a) UPCA for reasons of efficiency: Pursuant to Art. 33(3) UPCA, the LD can exercise its discretion when deciding to hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation (Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA) or to refer the counterclaim for…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, June 27, 2024, indicative decision, UPC_CFI_ 210/2023
Arguments on claim construction to be made with the Statement of Claim: According to R. 13(1)(n) RoP in cases of technically complex subject-matters, the Statement of Claim must already contain the claim construction if the patent in suit is not readily understandable on its own. In case the plaintiff does not comply, further legal issues…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, June 27, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_457/2023
Deadline Extensions due to R. 242A RoP applications in FRAND proceedings: If the Defendant deals extensively with license negotiations between itself and a patent pool in the context of the substantiation of the FRAND objection raised by it, the Claimant can only respond comprehensively to this argument if he can consult with employees of the…
2 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, June 26, 2024, order, UPC_CFI_164/2024
Independence of a counsellor is measured with reference to the possible harm to the interests of the party : The fact that the representative of a party is also the inventor of the patent-in-suit, the original applicant of the application underlying the patent-in-suit and the managing director of the first assignee of the patent does…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, June 26, 2024, procedual order, UPC_CFI_457/2023
Direct and present interest of the Intervener: The legal interest required for the admissibility of the intervention is given if the Intervener has a direct and present interest in the issuance of the order or decision requested by the assisted party. Such a legal interest can be affirmed if the patent in suit has been…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, June 24, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_456/2023
If access to written pleadings is restricted to representatives only according to R. 262A RoP, this is regularly a reason for the extension of time limits: R. 9.3 (a) RoP authorizes the court to extend time limits. However, this option should only be used with caution and only in justified exceptional cases. Such an exceptional…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD The Hague, June 25, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_195/2024
Applicant/Defendant has to bear the cost of simultaneous interpretation in the case of a Polish translation : To effectively meet the requirements of the fundamental right to be heard, it is important to allow parties to use simultaneous interpreter(s) if they deem this necessary to enable them to fully participate in the oral hearing that…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, February 26, 2024, order on provisional measures, UPC_CoA_335/2023
The patent claim is not only the starting point, but the decisive basis for determining the scope of protection of an EP under Art. 69 EPC in conjunction with the Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69 EPC: The interpretation of a patent claim does not depend solely on the strict, literal meaning of the…
5 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, February 12, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_425/2023
In case of multiple defendants in an infringement action, it is reasonable for the Judge-Rapporteur to extend the deadline for filing of a Statement of Defence to align the deadlines for all defendants: In the present case, service of the Statement of Claim was delayed for one of the three defendants. According to Rule 23…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, February 12, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_395/2023
In case of multiple defendants in an infringement action, it is reasonable for the Judge-Rapporteur to extend the deadline for filing of a Statement of Defence to align the deadlines for all defendants: In the present case, service of the Statement of Claim was delayed for some of the fourteen defendants. According to Rule 23…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, February 2, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_14/2023
Request of referral of a counterclaim for revocation to the Central Division by the parties (Art. 33(3)(c) UPCA): According to Article 33(3)(c) UPCA, a Local Division may refer the case for decision to the central division based on the agreement of the parties. Strong counterarguments would be necessary for the Local Division not to grant…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, April 9, 2024, Order concerning clarification of the date of service, UPC_CoA_86/2024
In appeal proceedings the rules concerning service (R. 270-279 RoP) apply mutatis mutandis: In appeal proceedings, Chapter 2 – Service (Rules 270 – 279 RoP) applies mutatis mutandis. Consequently, if R. 271.1 RoP applied during the proceedings at the Court of First Instance (in short: an electronic address for service was provided by the defendant…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, April 9, 2024, Order regarding R. 9 RoP extension request, UPC_CFI_501/2023
No time extension due to change of language of the proceedings: An extension of the deadline to file the statement of defense according to R. 9.3 RoP was rejected. The change of language of the proceedings one month before the deadline to file the statement of defense was not considered a justification for such an…
1 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, April 11, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_4952023
Multiple defendants and competence of the division: In the case of multiple defendants, if one of the defendants has its residence within the territory of the Local Division seized, Article 33(1)(b) UPCA must be applied, regardless of whether the other defendants are based inside or outside the Contracting Member States or inside or outside the…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.