Unified Patent Court (UPC)

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) hears disputes concerning European patents, including European patents with unitary effect, subject to the UPC Agreement (UPCA).

It is a specialised court common to the Contracting Member States. The system aims to reduce the fragmentation of European patent litigation, improve legal certainty and allow disputes affecting several territories to be addressed in coordinated proceedings.

Organisation and structure

The UPC comprises a Court of First Instance, a Court of Appeal and a Registry. Its jurisdiction covers European patents with and without unitary effect, subject to the UPCA. A Unitary Patent is a European patent for which unitary effect has been registered.

The Court of First Instance has a decentralised structure, comprising a Central Division seated in Paris with sections in Munich and Milan, alongside Local and Regional Divisions. These include Local Divisions in Paris, Milan and Munich and the Nordic-Baltic Regional Division.

Local and Regional Division panels generally comprise three legally qualified judges of more than one nationality. A technically qualified judge may be allocated in accordance with the applicable rules.

The Central Division hears, in particular, standalone revocation actions and actions for declarations of non-infringement, subject to Article 33 UPCA. Local and Regional Divisions principally hear infringement actions and may also determine counterclaims for revocation. The Court of Appeal sits in Luxembourg. Its panels generally comprise three legally qualified judges and two technically qualified judges, subject to the exceptions in the Agreement.

The system also provides for a Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre and a judicial training framework. Proceedings before the Court are governed by the UPCA and its Rules of Procedure.

Jurisdiction and remedies

The UPCA entered into force on 1 June 2023. Article 32 identifies the categories of action within the Court’s competence, including infringement, revocation, provisional measures and specified compensation claims. It does not confer jurisdiction over every dispute concerning a patent.

During the transitional period under Article 83, certain actions concerning European patents without unitary effect may still be brought before national courts. An opt-out may exclude UPC jurisdiction for eligible rights, subject to the statutory conditions.

Infringement proceedings may be brought by a patent proprietor or an entitled licensee. The allocation of a case to a Local, Regional or Central Division depends on Article 33, including the place of actual or threatened infringement and the defendant’s location. The claimant must establish the facts supporting the infringement claim; validity may be challenged under the applicable procedural rules.

The Court may grant provisional injunctions, evidence-preservation measures, damages and other remedies, subject to the requirements applicable to each form of relief.

Revocation may be sought through a standalone action or a counterclaim. For a European patent without unitary effect, the territorial scope of a decision must be assessed by reference to the Contracting Member States in which that patent has effect under Article 34 UPCA. A single decision may therefore affect several territories.

First-instance decisions and certain orders may be appealed. Time limits depend on the decision challenged and the applicable route of appeal. An appeal does not generally have suspensive effect unless the Court of Appeal orders otherwise on a reasoned request. Article 74 UPCA provides exceptions, including for decisions on revocation actions and counterclaims.

Strategic considerations

The coexistence of national proceedings and UPC proceedings during the transitional period requires careful coordination. Our UPC litigation practice addresses that coordination. Case law continues to develop across the divisions and the Court of Appeal. The choice of forum, language of proceedings and interaction with EPO opposition proceedings should be assessed early.

The economic case for centralised litigation depends on the territories and interests involved. Proceedings concerning only a limited market may call for a different approach from a dispute affecting several European markets. Similarly, the risk of revocation across several territories must be assessed in light of the patent’s territorial coverage and the rules governing appeals.

The procedure aims to allow first-instance cases to reach a decision within approximately one year, although the timetable depends on the proceedings. Preparation of the technical case and the evidence should begin before service of an action. Our litigation readiness review helps organise that preparation.

Withdrawal of an opt-out is subject to conditions, including the absence of proceedings already brought before a national court within Article 83(4). Forum selection should therefore be addressed before litigation begins.

Further reading

• UPC Litigation Watch: decisions and case law
• UPC Court of Appeal
• UPC Agreement, particularly Articles 9, 32–34, 74 and 83.

Dhenne Avocats represents clients in patent litigation before the Paris Judicial Court, the Paris Court of Appeal and the Unified Patent Court. Discuss a patent dispute with the firm.

This glossary entry provides general information and is not advice on an individual matter.