Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 JULY 2024

Nokia v. Mala Technologies: The UPC Interprets Its Relationship With National Courts

Marks & Clerk
Marks & Clerk
Contributor
Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk LLP was founded in 1887 by George Croydon Marks, who was joined in partnership by...

View firm profile
Explore more from Marks & Clerk

The Brussels I Regulation has been in force, under various names, since 1973 and defines general rules on the jurisdiction of the national courts within the EU. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has exclusive competence...

European UnionIntellectual Property

Brussels recast

The Brussels I Regulation has been in force, under various names, since 1973 and defines general rules on the jurisdiction of the national courts within the EU. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has exclusive competence over certain types of patent disputes and the Brussels regulation was recast (herein Brussels recast) to define the jurisdiction of the UPC amongst the EU courts.

In this decision, the UPC considered its jurisdiction under Brussels recast and the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) with regard to parallel national revocation proceedings that had been initiated before the entry into force of the UPCA.

The original articles of Brussels recast (important for this decision, particularly Arts. 29-32) were formulated to prevent conflicts of jurisdiction between national courts of EU member states. The UPC is not a court of a member state in this sense but is, instead, considered a "common court". Additional articles (Arts. 71a-71d) were

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from