Download now: Transatlantic Patent Litigation whitepaper - MORE THAN A PARALLEL CASE
​

Legal opinion now available on the UK’s continuing participation in the UPC post-Brexit

No items found.
​
September 16, 2016
Additional information
Chevron icon
Table of contents
Chevron icon
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

The IP Federation, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Intellectual Property Lawyers Association have obtained the opinion of leading counsel (Richard Gordon Q.C. and Tom Pascoe, both of Brick Court Chambers) on the UK’s ability to continue to participate in the UPC post leaving the European Union. As a contributor to the costs of obtaining of this opinion and through its membership of the IPLA, EIP have obtained a copy and it is available to download here .

Contrary to some earlier views based on the CJEU’s Opinion 1/09, the opinion leaves the door open to continuing participation. This is a particularly important question to have answered as calls for the UK to ratify the UPC grow across Europe. We therefore consider this to be a particularly important document for the IP community (and indeed government) to consider.

Recent Case Reports

See all Case Reports

Invalidity of juicer patent upheld on appeal
03 November 2026
The Court of Appeal upheld the invalidity of Hurom’s juicer patent for lack of inventive step, while clarifying the admissibility requirements for patent amendments and the use of the unamended description when construing amended claims. It also confirmed the UPC’s jurisdiction over infringement in Poland despite Poland not being a UPCA Contracting Member State, but found that Hurom had failed to establish infringement under Polish law.
​
Evidence preservation doesn’t stretch to interrogation
03 November 2026
The Court of Appeal confirmed that evidence-preservation orders may be granted ex parte where there is a demonstrable risk that evidence could be destroyed or become unavailable, and that such orders may extend to relevant commercial and promotional documents. However, Art. 60 UPCA does not permit a bailiff or expert to question the defendant’s personnel on substantive technical matters, which must instead be handled under the Court’s control.
​
UPC Court of Appeal clarifies claim construction, the role of party experts, and provisional measures in direct-competition cases
03 November 2026
The CoA’s decision of 30 April 2025 in Insulet v EOFlow provides important guidance on claim construction, the role of party-appointed experts and the requirements for provisional injunctions.
​