Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 JUNE 2025

LD Mannheim, June 6, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_471/2023

Bardehle Pagenberg
Bardehle Pagenberg
Contributor
Bardehle Pagenberg

Bardehle Pagenberg

IP practitioners with technical expertise As one of Europe’s leading IP law firms, BARDEHLE...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bardehle Pagenberg

According to all doctrines of equivalence or equivalence tests of the UPC contracting member states, equivalent patent infringement is ruled out if there is no technical...

GermanyIntellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

No equivalent infringement without essentially the same effect

According to all doctrines of equivalence or equivalence tests of the UPC contracting member states, equivalent patent infringement is ruled out if there is no technical-functional equivalence of the substitute means in the sense that the modified means do not perform essentially the same function in order to achieve essentially the same effect. Insofar as the same function is not taken as a reference, at least essentially the same effect is taken as a reference (following the Local Division Brussels, Beslissing ten gronde of January 17, 2025, mn. 98).

No isolated revocation of dependent sub-claims

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