389 results found

The UPC lacks international jurisdiction over non-EU/UPC defendants when alleged infringing acts occur exclusively in a third country, as there is no connection to the UPC territory.

The decision has to take grounds of fairness and all relevant circumstances into account, Art. 49(5) UPCA. Decisive are the respective interests at stake.

The plaintiff filed a claim for damages subsequent to a German patent infringement case in which the defendant had been found to infringe the German part of EP 1 740 740 B1.

The UPC Court of Appeal has established groundbreaking precedent on international jurisdiction over non-EU manufacturers in two parallel patent infringement cases involving Abbott Diabetes Care, Chinese manufacturer Sinocare, and Italian distributor Menarini.

The German Federal Court of Justice has confirmed that the Federal Cartel Office was right to conclude that processing of German end-customer data (on behalf of German business customers) constituted...

The court reaffirmed the general principle that the register of the Unified Patent Court and the proceedings before it are open to the public, as stipulated in Art. 10 (1) UPCA...

The UPC has jurisdiction for the central revocation action even if a prior national revocation action is pending

The qualification of a party as an SME or the submission of a declaration purporting to establish a party’s SME status pursuant to R. 370.8 RoP is not, in itself, sufficient to dispense with the obligation for said party to provide a security for costs in accordance with R. 158 RoP, if the requirements for the application of that rule are met.

The German Federal Court of Justice follows up on its "Flügelradzähler" case law and clarifies that the relevant point of reference for distinguishing between permissible repair and impermissible reconstruction is always the protected device.

Claims introduced for the first time during the interim proceedings in the infringement action, based on the scope of the patent in dispute within the framework of the auxiliary requests and the related submission of facts, are not admissible

Regarding the merits of the case, the panel confirms the decision by the Judge-rapporteur of January 20, 2026 (cf. our separate report). In view of the enforcement also in a non-UPC state (here: UK)...

The Court aligned time limits for statements of defense for defendants represented by the same counsel and with close corporate ties to avoid procedural complications and promote efficiency.

A broadly phrased motion for damages can include damages from ancillary transactions, even if not explicitly stated.

Compared to a patent, the utility model is simple and inexpensive to register, but one should not expect it to be too simple.

The Court's jurisdiction and competence, as referred to in R. 19.1 RoP, is not linked to whether a person bringing an action is ultimately entitled...

In Germany, lawyers are largely prohibited from offering litigation funding and agreeing on a performance-based fee. Legal tech providers who are not lawyers, on the other hand...

Ausgangspunkt der vorliegenden Entscheidung war ein Vorabentscheidungsersuchen des OLG Düsseldorf.

The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court addresses applications to withdraw in appeal proceedings involving Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V., NV Bekaert SA, and Polidoro S.p.a. concerning European Patent EP 2 037 175. The proceedings examine procedural rules governing withdrawal applications under the Rules of Procedure, specifically Rules 265.1, 265.2(c), and 370.9(b).