1. Key takeaways
The "same alleged infringement" condition
under Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA requires infringement of the same patent,
not that all defendants infringe with identical
products
This flexible interpretation avoids procedural fragmentation.
The question of which defendant is involved with which specific
product is a matter for the merits, not a preliminary
jurisdictional issue.
The "commercial relationship" condition under
Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA requires a link between all defendants, not that
the anchor defendant is linked to all others
Belonging to the same international group and
participating in related activities like manufacturing and
marketing the disputed products is sufficient to establish the
required “commercial relationship”.
