The UPC
Hub

Case reports, trends, insights and the litigators behind them, in one place.

Link copied

Ready for the UPC long before it opened.

We have run patent litigation across the UK and Germany for well over a decade. When the UPC opened in June 2023, our Uniphy team was ready from day one.

Our litigators and patent attorneys work as one team across UPC, UK and German proceedings.

Tap a year to explore

Established UK and German litigation practices

  • Built experience across electronics, telecoms, pharma and medtech
  • Integrated patent attorneys and litigators

Ran major cross-border actions across the UK and Germany

  • Handled FRAND, SEP and multi-jurisdictional disputes
  • Prepared for pan-European litigation long before the UPC existed

UPC goes live and we launch Uniphy

  • 40 UPC Representatives at launch
  • Seamless transition into UPC litigation from day one

Landmark wins: Optis v Apple (UK) and Datang v Samsung (Germany)

  • Reinforced our reputation as a pan-European litigation leader
  • Coordinated actions across the UK, Germany and the UPC

Growing UPC caseload and specialist team

  • Enhanced Europe-wide litigation strategy
  • Continuing to shape UPC practice
Uniphy

Read what the Court is deciding

Tags
No tags match that search.
Court
No courts match that search.
Sector
No sectors match that search.
0 of 100
Case Reports
Tag
Clear all
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
​
Tag
:
Tag

IPEC Refuses to “Doff its Cap” – Stays Firm on Cost Limits

23 February 2024
2024-02-23

Equisafety v Battle [2024] EWHC 283 (IPEC) Summary This case was originally a trade mark and passing off dispute between two entities over the use of the word mark "mercury" in relation to high...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

Access to documents – representation

20 February 2024
2024-02-20

Ocado v Autostore – appeal on access to documents UPC_CoA_404/2023 Order of 8 February 2024[1] In the Appeal by Ocado against the Order[2] from the Nordic Baltic regional division granting a request...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Access to documents
#
Representation
No items found.
No items found.
​

Denial of Interim Injunction Favours Start-up Amid Concrete Delivery Patent Dispute

15 February 2024
2024-02-15

Cloud Cycle Ltd v Verifi LLC & Anor [2024] EWHC 233 (IPEC) (07 February 2024) Summary This action concerns a claim by Cloud Cycle Limited ("CCL") for a declaration of non-infringement of EP (UK) 1...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

Financial penalties for disclosure of confidential information

14 February 2024
2024-02-14

In this article we discuss two cases which address financial penalties for breach of confidentiality. Krauss-Maffei Extrusion GmbH v Troester GmbH & Co KG (UPC_CFI_181/2023) Order of 27 December 2023...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Confidentiality
#
Penalty payment
No items found.
No items found.
​

Deletion of “claim-like” clauses: an EPO Board of Appeal allows them to remain in the granted patent (T 0438/22)

14 February 2024
2024-02-14

Summary A recent decision T 0438/22 from the EPO's Boards of Appeal questions the justification for the EPO's Guidelines for Examination requirement that "claim-like" clauses in the description of...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

Discretionary review or appeal?

13 February 2024
2024-02-13

Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd v Netgear Inc & Ors (UPC_CFI_9/2023) Order of Court of Appeal on 11 January 2024 (UPC_CoA_486/2023); Appeal against ORD_588901/2023 dated 11 December 2023 Huawei sued...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Appeal
#
Other procedural aspects
No items found.
No items found.
​

Discretion allowing in expert declarations

09 February 2024
2024-02-09

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH & Ors v Amgen Inc (UPC_CFI_1/2023) Order dated 24 January 2024 (ORD_2233/2024) The pleadings in this revocation action had progressed to the rejoinder by defendant...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Evidence (expert)
#
Other procedural aspects
No items found.
No items found.
​

EPO Board of Appeal applies the G2/21 test for post-published evidence

09 February 2024
2024-02-09

The EPO Board of Appeal decision on T 0852/20 has recently been published. It is another decision using the new test under G 2/21, which set out when post-published evidence can be relied upon for...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

AARKE AB v SODASTREAM Industries Ltd., Order of 16 January 2024

05 February 2024
2024-02-05

Background In a dispute between Aarke AB, a Swedish company, and SodaStream Industries Ltd, an Israeli company, Aarke, as the defendant to infringement proceedings, successfully applied to change the...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Language
No items found.
No items found.
​

Claim construction at the UPC

01 February 2024
2024-02-01

For a European patent to be granted, the claims must be "clear and concise". However, some ambiguity or lack of clarity may be identified in granted claims, during infringement or invalidity...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Infringement
No items found.
No items found.
​

EX PARTE PI GRANTED

25 January 2024
2024-01-25

Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH vs Mammut Sports Group AG and Mammut Sports Group GmbH Düsseldorf Local Division Order of 11 December 2023[1] Introduction Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH (in the following...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Infringement
#
Provisional injunction
No items found.
No items found.
​

Abbott v Dexcom [2024] EWHC 36 (Pat)

24 January 2024
2024-01-24

Abbott v Dexcom [2024] EWHC 36 (Pat) Background The first UK battle held in the wide-ranging (both in terms of number of patents and geographical area) patent fight between Abbott and Dexcom has...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

Requirements for an intervention

23 January 2024
2024-01-23

In the matter of an appeal by Ocado Innovation Limited and applications to intervene by (1) Mathys & Squire LLP and (2) Bristows (Ireland ) LLP Order of Court of Appeal dated 10 January 2024 By Order...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Intervention
No items found.
No items found.
​

Amendments to Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal: attempt to enhance timeliness for cases involving parallel litigation

23 January 2024
2024-01-23

Summary On the 1 January 2024, amendments made to the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal came into force [1]. A change to Article 15(1) means that a Board can now summon parties to oral...

No items found.
No items found.
No items found.
​

C-KORE v Novawell: Paris local division grants evidence preservation order in subsea testing apparatus dispute

10 January 2024
2024-01-10

Order of 14 November 2023 (ORD_587064/2023) This was another successful application for preserving evidence, following those in the Oerlikon v Himson, Oerlikon v Bhagat Group, Jozef Frans Nelissen v...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Infringement
No items found.
No items found.
​
No results found.
Please try updating your search criteria.

Winning mixed practice team

Since its establishment in 2011, our patent litigation team has been dedicated to delivering exceptional results.

With the UPC's launch announced in 2023, our patent litigators have been actively advising on various high-profile UPC proceedings, and appearing in UPC divisions across Europe.

​

German and UK litigators

Since 2014 our German patent litigators have handled major German national cases and, more recently, in leading cases at the UPC. EIP was successful in the first UPC anti-anti suit injunction, gained on behalf of our client.

The UK can be decisive when devising a litigation strategy in Europe.  With the success of our team of UK litigators, we are routinely trusted with high value cases including those at the highest Supreme Court of the UK.  We are well placed to advise on using the UK courts and/or the UPC’s “long arm” jurisdiction.

​

Patent attorneys doing litigation

Patent attorneys add unique value to litigation and enhance our results. 

This is especially so for the UPC because all patents litigated at the UPC have been granted by the European Patent Office (EPO) and so are governed by a unique blend of UPC and EPO case law which needs intricate knowledge.

Moreover, where possible the same patent attorney will have drafted and strategically prosecuted the case in suit, and can run any parallel EPO opposition proceedings, bringing deep technical continuity to the litigation.

‍

​

UPC strategy

The UPC presents unique challenges compared with national patent litigation.  The streamlined timeline from service to decision is short, around 12 months, and the judges are given limited time to work on a case. The court sets tight deadlines to prepare and file each round of written briefs. A UPC action needs deep technical analysis upfront; to develop the winning strategy and present the best arguments.

Often the UPC case is part of a multi-dimensional portfolio.  Our patent attorneys strategically prosecute patent applications and develop portfolios, working closely with our litigators, to secure claims ready for assertion and robust to challenge at the UPC.

Meet our Head of Knowledge

The UPC is still new by established court standards, and the body of case law is still evolving. Well before the UPC launched, our Head of Knowledge championed the UPC laws and processes, and he has continued to closely follow all the evolving case law.

Darren is a European patent attorney with decades of contentious experience at the EPO, and is an honorary professor at Queen Mary University of London, teaching IP law.

‍

Darren Smyth
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, Design Attorney, UPC Representative
Speak to an expert

Meet our UPC team

Our team includes leading Attorneys-at-Law in Germany, technically skilled European patent attorneys, and highly reputed UK solicitors with experience in some of the largest European patent cases. With specialists based in Germany, Sweden (home to the UPC’s only regional division), and the UK (Europe’s largest litigation venue outside the UPC), we field formidable teams tailored to each case.

Our attorneys have worked together successfully for many years, enabling us to respond quickly and intelligently under the UPC’s tight timelines and new procedures. We offer clients a single point of contact for co-ordinated, cross-border litigation support.

‍

Christof Höhne
Partner, Rechtsanwalt, UPC Representative
Jerome Spaargaren
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
Matthew Blaseby
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
Michael Nielsen
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
Monika Rai
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, Solicitor, UPC Representative
Isabelle Schaller
Partner, Rechtsanwältin, UPC Representative
Sebastian Fuchs
Partner, Rechtsanwalt, UPC Representative
Gareth Probert
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
Heather McCann
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
James Seymour
Partner, UK and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative
Catherine Howell
Partner, Solicitor

Discover our featured insights

Stay informed with the latest UPC developments and the global IP landscape. Tune into our EIP Talks podcast, explore expert insights and browse our published articles and thought leadership, all designed to keep you ahead in the world of intellectual property.

The UPC After Three Years: From Experiment to Enforcement Forum
15 July 2026
1,282 cases filed at the UPC in three years: infringement actions have surged while revocation filings stayed flat, easing fears the Court would become a European patent graveyard.
Choosing your SEP battleground: UPC, Germany or UK?
07 June 2026
Choosing the right venue for SEP litigation can significantly influence the outcome of FRAND disputes. This article compares the UPC, German and UK courts, examining their approaches to injunctions, FRAND defences, rate-setting and enforcement. It highlights the strategic advantages of each jurisdiction and explains why many SEP owners are increasingly turning to the UK and UPC as part of their European enforcement strategy.
Confidentiality at the UPC: What litigants need to know
21 January 2026
This article explains how the Unified Patent Court approaches confidentiality in litigation, outlining the procedures for restricting access to sensitive information, how confidentiality clubs are formed, and when hearings may be held in private. It highlights key case law shaping these rules, the balance between fair trial rights and protection of commercial data, and the penalties for breaches. Practical guidance is provided to help parties navigate applications, manage confidential documents, and understand what to expect throughout UPC proceedings.

The latest from the Newsroom on UPC

Replacement parts and the value of asserting a narrower claim combination
17 July 2026
The UPC's Düsseldorf Local Division found that Wessper's cartridges indirectly infringed Brita's patent, and that a narrower claim combination can turn a consumable into an essential element.
Preliminary objection on jurisdiction partially successful – UPC clarifies requirements of anchor-defendant jurisdiction for non-UPC territories
25 June 2026
The Hamburg Local Division let Nixu pursue US-based Infoblox in the UPC for Germany, France and Finland, but threw out the UK claim. To reach a non-UPC territory through an anchor defendant, a claimant must plead joint infringement there.
UPC applies party-driven equivalence test in absence of Court of Appeal guidance
25 June 2026
The Helsinki Local Division found AIM's TV-advertising patent valid but not infringed by TGI, and with no Court of Appeal ruling on equivalence yet, adopted the four-step test both sides put forward, the UPC following the parties' lead.
Prosecution history in claim interpretation at the EPO
10 June 2026
In Agathon v Intercom, the UPC's Milan Local Division confirmed that statements made during EPO prosecution are not binding but can offer low-weight guidance on the skilled person's view — here narrowing 'abuts' against the patentee.
Revocation of an order to inspect and preserve evidence as Applicant did not start proceedings on the merits, R. 198.1 RoP
09 June 2026
In Otec v Steros, the UPC's Dusseldorf Local Division revoked an ex parte inspection order after the applicant failed to sue on the merits in time, ordering all preserved evidence returned and destroyed.
UPC Court of Appeal reverses infringement ruling in both Germany and UK
05 June 2026
On 2 June 2026 the UPC Court of Appeal overturned the Mannheim Local Division's infringement findings against Kodak in both Germany and the UK, on a prior user right in Germany, and on lack of defendant liability in the UK, while upholding the validity of EP 3511174 as amended and laying down a structured framework for exercising jurisdiction over non-EU designations.
UPC finds infringement of two motorcycle tyres patents following international exhibition
05 June 2026
These Decisions from the Local Division of the Unified Patent Court in Milan relate to EP2519412 and EP3519207. The Applicant, Pirelli Tyre S.P.A. ("Pirelli") brought two separate infringement actions following respective seizure orders against Tianjin Kingtyre Group Co., Ltd ("Kingtyre") and Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber Co., Ltd. ("SYR"), in view of the exhibition of allegedly infringing products by the defendants at the "International Motorcycle Exhibition" ("EICMA") between 5 and 10 November 2024.

联系我们

We’d love to hear from you. Whether you're exploring ways to protect, manage or maximise the value of your intellectual property, we are here to provide tailored support and strategic insight.

Please complete the form below and we will be in touch shortly.

感谢您!我们已收到您提交的信息。
哎呀!提交表单时出错了。请重试。