Institutions: Luxembourg Court of Appeal
-
Court of Appeal, September 28, 2026, Procedural Order, UPC_CoA_126/2026
Even if the defendant has filed the counterclaim for revocation only conditionally, the defendant may still file an appeal: A defendant who has filed a conditional counterclaim for revocation has a legitimate interest in appealing a first-instance decision refusing to rule on an action for revocation, even after it has been determined that there was…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, September 28, 2026, Order, UPC_CoA_40/2026
No further pleadings or evidence are permitted once the appellate proceedings have reached an advanced procedural stage: The Court confirmed its broad case-management discretion to prevent additional written submissions at a late stage, consistent with the RoP’s objective of efficient, front-loaded proceedings. An appellant’s request to disregard a witness statement and related submissions as late-filed,…
1 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Court of Appeal, September 30, 2026, order, UPC_CoA_164/2026
Application for public access to the register: An application for public access to the register must be filed in the language of the proceedings. Division Court of Appeal UPC number UPC-CoA-164/2026 Type of proceedings Application for public access to the register proceedings Parties Hurtel Sp. z o.o. Koninklijke Philips N.V. Patent(s) EP 2 867 997…
1 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, September 28, 2026, Order, UPC-CoA-140/2026: Re-establishment of Rights for Appeal Concerning Conditional Revocation Counterclaims
Re-establishment of rights (R. 320.1 RoP) requires showing that appeal deadlines were missed despite all due care due to reasons beyond control. Under Rule 320.1 RoP, a party may obtain re-establishment of rights if it missed a statutory deadline despite exercising all due care required by the circumstances. The applicant must demonstrate that the failure…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, 18 September 2026, appeal against a cost decision, UPC_CoA_121/2026
Under Art. 74(2) UPCA, appeals against revocation decisions have automatic suspensive effect, preserving patent status erga omnes, unlike the general rule in Art. 74(1) UPCA: – This automatic effect reflects the specific nature of validity decisions, which apply erga omnes. Unlike Art. 74(1) UPCA, where suspensive effect requires a motivated request showing exceptional circumstances, Art.…
3 min Reading time→ -
CoA, September 21, 2026, order regarding an appeal against an order rejecting a preliminary objection, UPC_CoA_90/2026
Filing a declaration of non-infringement before patent grant raises a question of admissibility, not of UPC competence, under Art. 32(1)(b) UPCA: – Competence pursuant to Art. 32(1)(b) UPCA depends on the claimant’s actual intent in its statement of claim. Because the claimants sought a declaration of non-infringement against granted patents, the action falls within the…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, September 29, 2026, Order, UPC-CoA-140/2026: Calculation and Reimbursement of Court Fees for Revocation Counterclaim Appeals
Appeals concerning revocation counterclaims incur first-instance fees plus 10% under R. 228 and R. 370.5(a) RoP, subject to a pre-increase cap. Under Rule 228 and Rule 370.5(a) RoP, the fee for appealing a revocation counterclaim under Rule 220.1(a) RoP equals the first-instance counterclaim fee increased by 10%. This fee mirrors the infringement fee based on…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, September 3, 2026, Order concerning an application for the preservation of evidence and inspection (R. 192 RoP), UPC_CoA_113/2026
An order to preserve evidence pursuant to Art. 60 UPCA also allows for the seizure of promotional and commercial documents (potentially) proving infringing activities and is not limited to documents concerning the technical details of the product or process in question. : headnote 1: “The scope of application of Art. 60 UPCA is not limited…
5 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 28, 2026, Decision UPC_CoA_678/2025
Admissibility of patent amendments (R. 30.1 RoP): Review is limited to whether the patentee filed an explanation on Art. 84 and 123(2),(3) EPC compliance — not whether that explanation is convincing. Convincingness is a merits question, decided at the validity stage. Claim construction after amendment: The unamended parts of the description remain a valid explanatory aid for interpreting…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 31, 2026, Order, UPC_CoA_312/2025
Suspensive effect is the exception, not the rule for applications for rehearing (Art. 81(2) UPCA, R. 252 RoP). : The filing of an application for rehearing against a final decision of the Court of Appeal does not automatically suspend its enforceability. Suspensive effect requires a positive, separate decision of the Court and constitutes a departure…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 21, 2026, Order on Application for Provisional Measures, UPC-CoA-61/2026
Cost apportionment where success is achieved on only one of several patents at issue: The unsuccessful party may be ordered to bear costs specifically attributable to “its” patent (Art. 69(2) UPCA): In the dispute concerning preliminary measures, two patents were at issue originally, EP201 and EP198. However, the applicant withdrew its request based on EP201…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 21, 2026, Order on Application for Suspensive Effect, UPC_CoA_135/2026
Violation of principle of party disposition constitutes “manifest error”: The Court of First Instance is strictly bound by the relief requested according to Art. 76(1) UPCA and cannot award more than is requested. In case a court awards more than is requested (e.g. change of “and”-warning into “or”-disclaimer) this constitutes a manifest error under Art.…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 21, 2026, Order on the Admissibility of the Appeal, UPC-COA-0894/2025
Logging into the CMS via secure two-factor authentication is insufficient to make effective submissions: under Rule 4.1 RoP all pleadings must be signed with a certified electronic signature: The Court of Appeal confirmed that secure authentication to log into the CMS only verifies the user’s identity for system access. It does not replace the mandatory…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 27, 2026, Order to Produce Evidence, UPC_CoA_76/2026
R. 190 RoP does not permit fishing expeditions: The purpose of R. 190 RoP is to enable access to specified evidence that is not readily accessible to the party bearing the burden of proof. An order under R. 190 RoP requires reasonably available evidence supporting the plausibility of the claim and is subject to the…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 19, 2026, Decision, UPC-CoA-908/2025, UPC-CoA-909/2025, UPC-CoA-918/2025
New legal arguments raised on appeal are admissible under R. 222.2 RoP if grounded in facts already submitted before the Court of First Instance: R. 222.2 RoP only allows the Court of Appeal to disregard new facts and evidence, not new legal arguments. Since claim construction is a question of law, the appellant could challenge the first…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, August 17, 2026, Order on Permissibility and Appeal of Conditional Counterclaims for Revocation, UPC-CoA-40/2026, UPC-CoA-123/2026
Infringement actions and revocation counterclaims are separate actions under Art. 32(1) UPCA, making a conditional counterclaim an “inter-procedural” condition that determines whether a separate appeal or a cross-appeal must be lodged: Since the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation are adjudicated in separate proceedings, a condition linking the counterclaim to the outcome of the…
4 min Reading time→ -
CoA Luxemburg, August 13, 2026, Central Revocation Action, UPC_CoA_884/2025 (appeal from UPC_CFI_231/2024)
Added matter: Omitting a feature disclosed together with claimed features constitutes added matter only where an extricable functional or structural link exists between the omitted and claimed features (Art. 138(1)(c) EPC, Art. 65(2) UPCA).: One situation where added matter may arise is when claimed subject-matter is obtained by importing one or more features from a…
4 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.