Expert evidence plays a central role in patent litigation, and the Unified Patent Court is no exception. As the UPC’s jurisprudence continues to develop, parties and practitioners are gaining valuable insights into how the court approaches expert testimony: from the appointment process and standards of impartiality, to the practical realities of oral examination at hearings.
The Rules of Procedure (RoP) distinguish between party-appointed and court-appointed experts, each governed by distinct procedural requirements. Early case law has addressed cross-examination (or its absence), “hot tubbing”, the treatment of employee witnesses, and the role of experts in evidence preservation proceedings. This article examines the rules and emerging practice.