Topics: Art. 33 UPCA
-
LD Mannheim, April 20, 2026, Order, UPC_CFI_1291/2026, Anti-Anti Suit Injunction against “Interim Licence” application before Chinese Court
The UPC has jurisdiction to issue an AASI to secure pending patent infringement proceedings before the UPC (Art. 31, 32(1)(c), 33(1)(a) UPCA) (mn. 16 et seq.): Imminent infringement of patents within the meaning of Article 32(1)(a) UPCA is not only its unlawful use. Also the application for a foreign injunction with the aim to prevent…
8 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, February 12, 2026, preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_575/2025
According to Art. 31 UPCA in conjunction with Art. 71b(1) and (2) and Art. 7(2) of the Brussels I recast regulation the UPC has international jurisdiction over a non-EU defendant if infringing acts are sufficiently alleged in a Contracting Member State: The Court has an ex officio duty under Art. 28 Brussels I recast reegulation…
4 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Central Division Paris, January 26, 2026, Order concerning review pursuant to R. 333 RoP, UPC_CFI_999/2025
A subsidiary is not the “same party” as its parent under Art. 33(4) UPCA if it has its own genuine business activity, regardless of corporate control: “Same party” is a strict concept. Parent and subsidiary are normally distinct parties, even with 100% shareholding or strong control. They are only treated as one if their interests…
5 min Reading time→ -
CoA, September 5, 2024, Order on connection joinder of proceedings, UPC_CoA_106/2024
A connection joinder pursuant to R. 340 RoP cannot result in the referral of an action to another division of the Court of First Instance beyond the possibilities provided for referral of actions in Art. 33 UPCA.: A joinder pursuant to R. 340 RoP cannot result in the referral of an action to another division…
3 min Reading time→ -
Central Division, Paris Seat, 19 July 2024, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_255/2023
Concurrent pendency of invalidity proceedings before different divisions and criteria for exercising the Court’s discretion, Art. 33 (3) UPCA: In the situation of concurrently pending invalidity attacks by different parties against the same patent before different divisions (here: revocation action before CD and counterclaim(s) for revocation before LD) the local division has a discretion either…
8 min Reading time→ -
CoA, May 28, 2024, Order, UPC_CoA_22/2024
Regularly proceedings must be conducted in a way, which will allow the final oral hearing at first instace to take place within one year. As a general principle, the Court will not stay proceedings: Art. 33.10 UPCA and R. 295.a RoP must be applied and interpreted in accordance with the fundamental right to an effective…
6 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, 13 November 2023, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_255/2023
Scope of Article 33 (4) UPCA: same parties: Art. 33(4) UPCA concerns, inter alia, the jurisdiction for revocation actions. If an action for infringement between the “same parties” relating to the same patent has been brought before a local or a regional division, revocation actions may only be brought before the same local or regional…
7 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.