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

Be careful what you wish for - Court of Appeal refuses to let party rely on argument it had dropped multiple years ago

30 November 2023
2023-11-30

Lufthansa Technik AG v Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 1306 The Court of Appeal has denied Lufthansa permission to rely on certain arguments at an upcoming damages inquiry...

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

Clearview AI victorious on a fact specific exemption but what does this judgment mean for the extra territorial effect of the UK GDPR

29 November 2023
2023-11-29

Clearview AI victorious on a fact specific exemption but what does this judgment mean for the extra territorial effect of the UK GDPR, in particular Article 3(2)(b)? (Clearview AI Inc v The...

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

G 2/21 applied by the referring EPO Technical Board; useful guidance on the test for reliance on post-published evidence in the post plausibility era

29 November 2023
2023-11-29

The referring Board to G 2/21 has now published its full written decision in T 0116/18, following the issuance of the minutes in September. The Decision attempts to clarify the requirements of G...

#
EPO
No items found.
No items found.
​

Coffee machine litigation leads to early defeat for patentee

28 November 2023
2023-11-28

CUP&CINO Kaffeesystem-Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG v ALPINA COFFEE SYSTEMS GmbH, Order of 13 September 2023[1] In a case before the Vienna Local Division, the patent holder, CUP&CINO Kaffeesystem-Vertrieb...

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

Milan Local Division Grants Inspection Order

24 November 2023
2023-11-24

The Milan Local Division has granted an inspection order[1] pursuant to Rules 192-199 RoP, the first order granted by the UPC allowing inspection of a defendant's premises.

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Confidentiality
#
Evidence (general)
#
Preservation of evidence
No items found.
No items found.
​

Court refuses to close the stable door after the horse has bolted in patent dispute

23 November 2023
2023-11-23

Saint-Gobain Adfors S.A.S v 3M Innovative Properties Company [2023] EWHC 2769 (Pat) The High Court has rejected an application made by 3M to restrict Saint-Gobain's use of information disclosed by 3M...

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

It’s been emotional: the High Court says goodbye to excluding AI inventions as computer programs

22 November 2023
2023-11-22

On 21 November 2023 the High Court of England and Wales published its judgment in Emotional Perception AI v Comptroller-General of Patents [2023] EWHC 2948 (Ch) in which it found a patent application...

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

What a relief! Court of Appeal permits a party to rely on evidence served two years late

13 November 2023
2023-11-13

Lufthansa Technik AG v Panasonic Avionics Corporation [2023] EWCA Civ 1273 The Court of Appeal has granted Panasonic an extension of time to a deadline so that they can rely upon a witness statement...

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

Lessons from Harvard: UK-based Nanostring ordered to pay EUR 300,000 as security for legal costs in revocation action

03 November 2023
2023-11-03

NanoString Technologies Europe Limited v President and Fellows of Harvard College (UPC_CFI_252/2023) Decision delivered on 30 October 2023 (Order no.

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Security for costs
No items found.
No items found.
​

Astellas’ Validity Success Not Enough to Catch Competitors’ Products on Overactive Bladder Treatment

03 November 2023
2023-11-03

The High Court has handed down its judgment in Astellas v Teva and Sandoz regarding Astellas' patent covering treatment for overactive bladder.

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

Should the language of proceedings be changed: balancing the interests of the parties

02 November 2023
2023-11-02

Plant-e Knowledge B.V. & Plant-e B.V. v Arkyne Technologies S.L. Order of 18 October 2023 (ORD_581189/2023) The claimants, two Netherlands companies, ("Plant-e") launched an infringement action on 12...

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

Opt-out Withdrawal Ineffective: Choices have Consequences!

31 October 2023
2023-10-31

AIM Sport Vision AG v Supponor Oy & Others (UPC_CFI_214/2023) Decision of 20 October 2023 (ORD_572699/2023 and ORD_5821/2023) Facts & Main Arguments These proceedings before the Unified Patent Court...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Infringement
#
Jurisdiction
#
Opt out
No items found.
No items found.
​

First penalty payment in a UPC case

30 October 2023
2023-10-30

myStromer AG v Revolt Zycling AG Düsseldorf Local Division Order of 18 October (ORD_526778/ 2023)[1] Following its first ex parte provisional injunction[2], the UPC (Düsseldorf Local Division)...

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

Dr Marian Rogers Croak, Black History Month 2023

30 October 2023
2023-10-30

In this our fifth and final article for Black History Month 2023, we profile Dr Marian Rogers Croak. Dr Marian Rogers Croak is one of a few contemporary black inventors whose work has been...

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

UPC grants access to pleadings for the first time

25 October 2023
2023-10-25

Ocado Innovation Limited v Autostore AS & Others – Order of 17 October 2023 (ORD 543819/2023) In September we reported on two judgments by Munich Central Division refusing requests for access to...

#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Access to documents
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。