UPC Appeals: What the Numbers Show

The choice of a division before the Unified Patent Court is still driven largely by reputation. German divisions are said to be fast and patentee-friendly, the others less tested. Three years of operation make it possible to test that reputation against the data the Court publishes and against what actually happens on appeal.

What the official figures show

According to the statistics published by the Court, as at 28 February 2026, 1,130 cases had been brought before the Court of First Instance since it opened on 1 June 2023, and 321 before the Court of Appeal. The Munich Local Division remains first by number of infringement actions, ahead of Düsseldorf, Mannheim and The Hague.

The language of proceedings has shifted. Across 2026 cases, English accounts for 62.5% of proceedings before the Court of First Instance and 79.3% before the Court of Appeal, against 34.7% and 10.3% for German. Treating the UPC as a German court operating in German no longer matches practice.

Reversal rates, division by division

Over the first two years, an analysis of the 41 appeals decided showed a reversal rate of about 36%, with decisions upheld in 61.5% of cases, fully reversed in a third and partly reversed in a few. Munich and Düsseldorf sat around 33%, Mannheim at 20% and Paris at 16.7%, the other divisions having too few decisions to be meaningful.

That ranking does not measure the quality of a division. It measures exposure: the division that decides earliest and most often mechanically supplies the material for the first appeals, at a time when the Court of Appeal's case law did not yet exist.

Provisional measures concentrate the risk

The difference lies less with the division than with the type of action. The reversal rate for provisional measures reached about 46%, against 31.6% for infringement actions and 20% for revocation actions.

The explanation is procedural. The judge hearing an application for provisional measures decides fast, on an incomplete file, under a validity standard the Court of Appeal only settled in February 2024 in NanoString (UPC_CoA_335/2023). An order made before that clarification stood a strong chance of being revisited, as we set out in our analysis ofprocedural uncertainty before the UPC.

What this changes in forum selection

Three practical consequences follow. First, a division's reputation ages faster than the data: a choice based on 2023 decisions says nothing about the panel that will decide in 2027. Second, reversal risk should be assessed by type of action rather than by city, which matters most where the strategy rests on a preliminary injunction. Third, language has become an operational criterion as much as a legal one: the spread of English brings the divisions closer together and narrows the historic advantage of the German-speaking ones.

The forum choice therefore remains a matter of judgment, but one built on current data, the division's predictable timetable, the composition of the panel and the nature of the relief sought.

Key takeaways

• As at 28 February 2026, 1,130 cases had been brought before the Court of First Instance and 321 before the Court of Appeal.
• English has become the majority language of proceedings, at 62.5% at first instance across 2026.
• Over the first two years, the overall reversal rate in decided appeals stood at around 36%.
• Provisional measures are the decisions most often reversed, at around 46%.
• The initial caseload of the German divisions explains much of their exposure to reversal.

Frequently asked questions

Which UPC division receives the most cases?

The Munich Local Division remains first by number of infringement actions, ahead of Düsseldorf, Mannheim and The Hague, according to the statistics as at 28 February 2026.

What is the reversal rate of UPC decisions?

Over the first two years, about 36% of decisions that went to a decided appeal were reversed, wholly or in part. The rate varies sharply with the type of action.

Why are provisional measures reversed more often?

The judge decides under time pressure on an incomplete file, and the applicable validity standard was only settled by the Court of Appeal in February 2024. Orders made earlier were therefore exposed.

Is the UPC a German-speaking court?

Not really. Across 2026 cases, English accounts for 62.5% of proceedings at first instance and 79.3% before the Court of Appeal.

Dhenne Avocats builds forum strategies before the Unified Patent Court, from the choice of division and language to the conduct of the appeal. Talk to us.

This article is an original and substantially updated adaptation of an analysis by Matthieu Dhenne first published on the Kluwer Patent Blog on 2 June 2025: Du Hast, But Not So Fast: Lessons from Two Years of UPC Appeals.