Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 FEBRUARY 2026

New Dawn Or Damp Squib? Mediation And Arbitration At The UPC

Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Explore more from Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.

The Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC) is an integral part of the Unified Patent Court (UPC). However, while the Court started operating in 2023 and received almost 1,000 cases in its first two years...

LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Cyrille Rousseau
Cyrille Rousseau
Author LinkedIn connections

The Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC) is an integral part of the Unified Patent Court (UPC). However, while the Court started operating in 2023 and received almost 1,000 cases in its first two years, the PMAC will only begin handling alternative dispute resolution (ADR) cases this year, with a formal opening ceremony to take place on June 2 in Ljubljana, Slovenia.

The journey so far

During 2024 and 2025, a number of steps crucial for the operation of the PMAC took place. In September 2024, Alea Zalar, a former judge and president of the District Court of Ljubljana and former Minister of Justice in Slovenia, was appointed as its director. An Expert Committee with 11 members was also appointed.

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.

Register for freeORLog in

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.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UPC CoA Confirms “gold Standard” For Added Matter In Sibio v Abbott

The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court recently issued a decision examining whether omitting an elastomeric sealing member from a patent claim constitutes added matter, applying the EPO's "gold standard" test while emphasizing the importance of functional and structural relationships between features. The ruling provides crucial insight into how the UPC approaches intermediate generalizations and whether its methodology differs from the notoriously strict EPO practice on added subject-matter.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
HGF Law
HGF Law
Article

G 1/25: When Must The Description Be Adapted To Amended Claims?

The European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal has issued a landmark decision in G 1/25 "Hydroponics," addressing a fundamental question that has divided practitioners for years: when patent claims are amended during examination, must the description be adapted to match? The ruling establishes that inconsistencies between claims and descriptions only require correction when they result in non-compliance with the European Patent Convention, not merely for achieving formal consistency.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Article

G 1/25: When Must The Description Be Adapted To Amended Claims?

The European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal has issued a landmark decision in G 1/25 "Hydroponics," addressing a fundamental question that has divided practitioners for years: when patent claims are amended during examination, must the description be adapted to match? The ruling establishes that inconsistencies between claims and descriptions only require correction when they result in non-compliance with the European Patent Convention, not merely for achieving formal consistency.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.