Patent case: Pirelli Tyre S.P.A. v. Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber Co., Ltd., UPC

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 exceptional circumstances that it may be presumed that the patent documentation represents the general knowledge common to a person skilled in the art. Such exceptional circumstances arise, for example, where a body of patent literature provides a coherent picture that a particular technical procedure is generally known. In the present case, there is evidence of the existence of a series of patent documents strictly relating to the specific field of tyres, in which the same technique for the plan view representation of the tread pattern is incorporated, thereby constituting the common general knowledge of a person skilled in the art. The principle of proximity of evidence allows for the shifting of the burden of proof where the party bearing the burden of proof has provided strong indications regarding the fact to be proven (here, the patent holder through photographic reproductions of the defendant’s products) and the opposing party (here, the defendant accused of patent infringement) has privileged access to the documents and information that would allow that fact to be ascertained directly. The Court of Justice has focused on this point in cases where the defendant’s refusal to disclose information within their direct control may compromise the effectiveness of the evidentiary regime, requiring the national court to assess the information asymmetry between the parties (see Judgment of 21 July 2011, Kelly, C-104/10, paragraphs 38 et seq.).

Case date: 26 May 2026
Case number: CFI 770/2024, CFI 556/2025
Court: UPC Local divisions of the Court of First Instance Milan

A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law