Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 APRIL 2026

LD Paris, April 10, 2026, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_301/2025

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

Unlike in case of a counterclaim for revocation (R. 29 et seq. RoP) or an application to amend the patent (R. 30 et seq. RoP), where the number and content of the pleadings are precisely set out, the Rules of Procedure do not contain respective provisions with respect to a FRAND defence.

GermanyIntellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

The RoP lack specific pleading rules for a FRAND defence.

Unlike in case of a counterclaim for revocation (R. 29 et seq. RoP) or an application to amend the patent (R. 30 et seq. RoP), where the number and content of the pleadings are precisely set out, the Rules of Procedure do not contain respective provisions with respect to a FRAND defence.

General principles of ‘fairness’ and adversarial proceedings from the preamble to the RoP (point 2) apply.

In the absence of specific rules, the Court must therefore apply the general principles of ‘fairness’ and adversarial proceedings set out in the preamble to the RoP (point 2).

The Court reasoned that since the FRAND defence was raised by the defendant, it was justified for the claimant, as the counter-defendant in the FRAND defence, to have the final say to ensure a ‘fair trial’.

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