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
-
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→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
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→ -
LD Munich, July 3, 2025, procedural order on security for costs (R. 158 RoP), UPC_CFI_127/2024 et al
Even if the Defendant of an infringement action is, formally, at the same time the Claimant of a counterclaim for revocation, they are entitled to a security also for procedural costs caused by filing the counterclaim for revocation pursuant to Art. 69(4) UPCA and Rule 158.1 RoP.: According to the Court of Appeal’s decision in…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, July 2, 2025, procedural order on security for procedural costs (R. 158 RoP), UPC_CFI_245/2025
An intervener on the Defendant’s side does not have to provide security for procedural costs pursuant to Rule 158 RoP. : While the intervener is to be treated as a party pursuant to Rule 315.4 RoP and may be liable for cost reimbursement as such, this is a different question from whether they have to…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, June 30, 2025, order on reimbursement of Court fees, UPC_CFI_504/2023
Oral procedure is closed in the meaning of Rule 370.9 (c) RoP with the closure of the oral hearing.: Rules 111 to 119 RoP do not include a definition of the closure of oral procedure. However, it follows from Rule 111 (b) RoP, which stipulates that the Presiding Judge shall “ensure that the action is…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, June 26, 2025, order concerning security of costs and disposal of an action that has become devoid of purpose
When an applicant withdraws its request for provisional measures on appeal, the action becomes devoid of purpose. The Court may then dispose of the action under R. 360 of RoP.: The extent of the legal review in relation to costs (Art. 69 (1) UPCA) where the action is disposed of according to R. 360 RoP…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, June 20, 2025, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_149/2024, UPC_CFI_127/2024
In the case of service outside the UPCA Contracting Member States, preliminary objections must be filed within one month of the actual date of service.: R. 271.6 (b) RoP stating that a statement of claim shall in general be deemed to be served on the addressee on the tenth day following posting does not apply…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, June 23, 2025, order concerning an application for the revocation of provisional measures, UPC_CoA_286/2025
Court fees are considered paid on time if the transfer order is given to the bank when lodging the pleading or application, provided the payment is subsequently received.: This interpretation of Art. 70(2) UPCA and R. 371 RoP ensures that the lodging party has control and can easily verify the timely payment. In view of…
2 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.