The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has transformed European patent litigation, creating a central forum for patent enforcement and validity challenges across participating EU Member States. As UPC case law continues to develop, businesses and practitioners closely monitor decisions that shape litigation strategy, procedural practice, and the interpretation of substantive patent law.
This category tracks key UPC developments, including infringement actions, revocation proceedings, preliminary injunctions, procedural rulings, and judgments from both the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal. Our contributors analyse significant decisions and emerging trends, highlighting their practical implications for patent owners, challengers, in-house counsel, and litigation teams.
For professionals involved in European patent disputes, portfolio management, or freedom-to-operate assessments, this section provides timely commentary and expert analysis of the latest UPC decisions and the evolving body of UPC case law.
The first question before a European launch is not whether the product infringes. It is where, against whom, on what record and on what timetable that question will be tested. Market-entry opinions…
The least reliable line in a European patent portfolio review is the one that looks most reliable. Opted out: yes. The field is binary, the source is public, and the answer takes four seconds to…
Before the Unified Patent Court, a launch communication leads a double life. It can show that infringement is imminent. It can also fix the moment when the right holder knew enough to ask for…
The first strategic choice in a patent dispute is not where to sue. It is where to secure the evidence that will make the claim pleadable, quantifiable and commercially credible. A case may…
If a final decision on an infringement action has already been taken, for a second (consecutive) infringement action with respect to the same patent and between the same parties the question arises…
The Court concurs with the interpretative approach expressed by the EPO Board of Appeal (see Decision T1000/12 of 17 December 2023, T 412/09 of 9 May 2012 et al) according to which it is only in…
While the function of a structural element must be considered when interpreting a claim feature relating to such an element, the interpretation must likewise take into account the physical and…
On 22 June 2026, the Court of Appeal of the UPC handed down two closely connected orders in the dispute between Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyage and the Bosch group. Read together, they do something more…
A realistic starting point is typically a prior art disclosure as a whole. Absent a specific reason or pointer in the disclosure itself (or based on common general knowledge) to do so, the selection…
