Home » UPC decisions » Local Division » Paris Local Division » LD Paris, January 16, 2026, decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_702/2024, UPC_CFI_369/2025

LD Paris, January 16, 2026, decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_702/2024, UPC_CFI_369/2025

3 min Reading time

In view of the CJEU decision BSH vs Electrolux, the UPC does not have jurisdiction to rule on the validity of the Swiss part of the EP (non-UPC state, Lugano Convention). But it can rule on infringement unless there is a reasonable risk that the patent will be revoked by the Swiss authorities in which case the UPC must stay the infringement proceedings. In the present case, the UPC found a significant risk in view of the unconditional limitations of the patent by claimant in the UPC states, whereas the Swiss part was left in the initially granted form. In the absence of pending revocation proceedings in Switzerland, the UPC did not stay and dismissed the infringement claim. (Mn. 123-125)

The limitation of an European patent with unitary effect takes effect retroactively from the date of grant of the European patent. It is deemed to be valid from the date of its grant as long as it has not been revoked by a court. (Mn. 141)

A document that is not accessible to the public (here: internal technical document+marketed product+commercial brochures) does not belong to the common general knowledge. (Mn. 58-60)

Division

Paris Local Division

UPC number

UPC_CFI_702/2024, UPC_CFI_369/2025

Type of proceedings

Infringement action, counterclaim for revocation

Parties

IMC Créations vs Mul-T-Lock

Patent(s)

EP 4 153 830

Jurisdictions

UPC member states, Switzerland


Was the article helpful?


Categories


Tags

  • Nobuchika Mamine, Attorney-at-Law (Rechtsanwalt), Certified IP Lawyer, UPC Representative, Senior Associate at BARDEHLE PAGENBERG

    Attorney-at-law (Rechtsanwalt), Certified IP Lawyer, UPC Representative

Stay in the loop

Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.

* = Required field