Brussels I bis Regulation

The Brussels I bis Regulation, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of 12 December 2012, governs jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the European Union. It applies to patent disputes as soon as there is a cross-border element, and its interpretation determines whether acts committed in several States can be brought before a single court.

Grounds of jurisdiction under the Brussels I bis Regulation

The defendant is in principle sued in the courts of its domicile (Article 4). An infringement action may also be brought before the court of the place where the harmful event occurred (Article 7(2)), and several co-defendants may be sued together where the claims are closely connected (Article 8(1)). Article 24(4), however, reserves disputes concerning the registration or validity of patents to the courts of the State of filing or registration, while Article 35 allows provisional measures to be sought from the courts of another State.

Validity raised as a defence

The GAT v LuK judgment of 13 July 2006 (Case C-4/03) extended the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of grant to invalidity raised as a defence. The BSH Hausgeräte v Electrolux judgment of 25 February 2025 (Case C-339/22) held that the courts of the defendant's domicile retain jurisdiction to rule on infringement of the foreign part of a European patent, validity remaining reserved to the courts of the State of grant, and that Article 24(4) does not apply to patents granted by a third State, whose validity may then be assessed with effect limited to the parties. The long arm jurisdiction is significantly broadened as a result.

The Regulation and the UPC

Regulation (EU) No 542/2014 inserted Articles 71a et seq. into the Brussels I bis Regulation, which treat the Unified Patent Court as a court of a Member State and organise its jurisdiction over defendants domiciled outside the Union. The Court relies on them to found decisions covering several territories, which fuels extensive litigation over the extraterritorial reach of its orders.

Key points

The Regulation governs the choice of forum before any consideration of the merits. Suing the defendant in its domicile now makes it possible to concentrate acts committed in several States, at the cost of a validity debate that falls outside the jurisdiction of the court seised. Lis pendens and related actions under Articles 29 and 30 remain the first weapons of a party seeking to move the dispute.

---

This glossary entry is general in scope and does not constitute legal advice.

Dhenne Avocats litigates patent disputes before the Paris Judicial Court, the Paris Court of Appeal and the Unified Patent Court. Where the question arises in a real case, the useful moment is almost always before proceedings are issued.

Patent litigation · Unified Patent Court · UPC case law · Tell us about your situation