UPC Litigation Watch


UPC decisions, our analysis, corpus data and the preparation routes, gathered in the Lab’s UPC space.

Prepare a claim or a defence by comparing UPC and national routes and identifying the evidence, timing and costs to examine. How to use it: answer the “Prepare my strategy” questionnaire to obtain an orientation memo, or search decisions by keyword, party, division or topic to investigate a specific issue.

Updated every week. Subscribe to the watch to follow new developments.

FRAND disputes: A quick orientation between litigation and the UPC mediation and arbitration centre for FRAND disputes.

Maintained by Dhenne Avocats, a Paris firm dedicated to patent litigation · summaries written from the official decision · Scope and method

2,390 decisions recorded
1 June 2023 since the Court opened
3 November 2026 latest decision added

Browse the database

The database is updated every week.

The materials and tools on this page, including any results they produce, are provided for general information. They do not constitute legal advice and create no relationship between the user and the firm. Every dispute calls for its own analysis of the record, the calendar and the proper forum. For advice on your situation, contact the firm.

Prepare my strategy

Which strategy for your dispute?

Compare UPC and national routes using the right, territories, evidence and budget. The tool filters options, then explains the steps, known costs and required checks.

  1. Answer the essential questions in a few minutes: your position, the right at stake, the timing and your objective.
  2. Complete the following sections if needed to refine the options.
  3. Receive a summary, the routes to examine and a downloadable orientation memo that you can share with the firm.

The engine applies explicit rules and does not predict a judgment. Your answers stay in your browser: the tool neither sends them to the firm nor stores them.

For a first summary, the essentials are enough: your position, your main objective, the type of right, its opt-out status and the countries where the patent is in force. The other sections refine the options.

Enable JavaScript to use the questionnaire. The page’s analysis and sources remain accessible.

Example of a result. The holder of a classic European patent with no opt-out, whose protection and alleged acts are located in France, Germany and the Netherlands, wants to stop sales. The summary lists the divisions to consider (Paris, The Hague and the German divisions), then compares a coordinated UPC action, an action brought first in one national market and a targeted audit followed by negotiation, with the checks required for each (opt-out, countries covered, parties, time limits, costs).

Have this memo reviewed by one of the firm’s attorneys (initial discussion, no obligation)

Understand an issue

Key issues in UPC litigation

Start from a question: a short explanation, then the decisions in the database that address it. The headings follow the categories of the Court’s classification, shown in small type in the full list.

Can I obtain fast relief before the merits?

The Court may order provisional measures, including an injunction, before any judgment on the merits. It considers in particular urgency, the likelihood of validity and infringement, and the balance of interests.

Decisions: Provisional measures

How can I obtain evidence of infringement?

Before or during proceedings, the Court may order the preservation of evidence, an inspection of premises or the production of documents. The decisions set out the required standard and how confidential information is protected.

Decisions: Preservation of evidence · Inspection · Evidence

Does the UPC have jurisdiction over my patent?

Jurisdiction depends on the right (European patent, unitary patent, SPC), any opt-out, and the connections between the acts, the parties and the divisions. A preliminary objection allows it to be challenged at the outset.

Decisions: Jurisdiction · Preliminary objection

How can a patent’s validity be challenged?

Revocation may be sought in a standalone action, in principle before the central division, or by counterclaim in response to an infringement action.

Decisions: Revocation

What does a case cost and who bears the costs?

Court fees set by the Court’s scale are complemented by reimbursement of the successful party’s representation costs, within ceilings linked to the value of the dispute.

Decisions: Costs

How can confidential information be protected?

Documents and pleadings may be protected, in particular by restricting access to certain persons. Third-party access to the file is regulated.

Decisions: Confidentiality · Access to the case file

What does an appeal change?

The Court of Appeal hears appeals against decisions on the merits and certain orders. An appeal has, in principle, no suspensive effect.

Decisions: Appeals · Review of case management

Two issues have a dedicated entry: standard-essential patents and FRAND, life sciences and pharma.

All categories in the database

Analysis and commentary

Decisions requiring closer examination are discussed in separate analyses on the firm’s blog. Matthieu Dhenne also publishes on the Kluwer Patent Blog and in specialist journals.

Latest analysis

Matthieu Dhenne on the Kluwer Patent Blog

International case law

Explore our dedicated FRAND Litigation Watch and Pharma Litigation Watch. The international FRAND and pharma case law explorer brings together leading decisions of the CJEU, the Bundesgerichtshof, the UK and US Supreme Courts and the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal.

Find a decision

The UPC decisions database

All decisions and orders of the Court since 1 June 2023, without editorial selection. Each record links to the official decision, the only authoritative source.

By court

By division

Latest decisions added

Appellant v Amycel (CoA, UPC_CoA_935/2025, 2 November 2026)

2 November 2026 CoA / Luxembourg (LU) / Appeal RoP220.1 Decision with commentary

In a decision of 2 November 2026 (UPC_CoA_935/2025), the Court of Appeal, presided over by Klaus Grabinski, sets aside the decision by default given on 21 October 2025 by The Hague Local Division against a defendant established in Poland, together with the…

Read the analysis

Netflix Services Germany v DivX (CoA, UPC_CoA_177/2026, 2 November 2026)

2 November 2026 CoA / Luxembourg (LU) / Application Rop 223 Decision with commentary

In an order of 2 November 2026 (UPC_CoA_176/2026 and UPC_CoA_177/2026), the Court of Appeal dismisses Netflix’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the decision of the Munich Local Division of 15 September 2026, which found it liable for indirect infringement…

Read the analysis

Netflix Services Germany v DivX (CoA, UPC_CoA_176/2026, 2 November 2026)

2 November 2026 CoA / Luxembourg (LU) / Application Rop 223 Decision with commentary

In an order of 2 November 2026 (UPC_CoA_176/2026 and UPC_CoA_177/2026), the Court of Appeal dismisses Netflix’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the decision of the Munich Local Division of 15 September 2026, which found it liable for indirect infringement…

Read the analysis

Browse all recorded decisions

Scope and method

What the database contains

The database systematically records decisions and orders of the Local, Regional and Central Divisions of the Court of First Instance and of the Court of Appeal. Each entry identifies the court, division, type of action, parties, case numbers and registry reference, and links to the official decision, which alone is authoritative.

The Court in numbers

The Court’s pace, the activity of each division, the types of proceedings and the rise of appeals: the figures behind the database, reconciled with the official register and kept up to date. See the UPC statistics.

The date of the latest decision added is displayed above. Counts cover decisions and orders, not distinct cases. Importing metadata and reviewing legal analysis are separate steps: consult the status shown on each record.

Our method

The firm’s summaries are based on the text of the decision and explain the court’s holding without extrapolation. Where only the metadata have been verified, the entry expressly identifies that limitation.

Work and publications of Matthieu Dhenne: Kluwer Patent Blog, SSRN, Google Scholar, LinkedIn.

Who maintains this database

UPC Litigation Watch is maintained by the Dhenne Avocats team, a Paris litigation boutique devoted to patent disputes, acting before the Paris Judicial Court and the Unified Patent Court. The firm regularly comments on the Court’s case law, notably at the Kluwer Patent Blog. Records distinguish documentary metadata from reviewed summaries. Their verification status is stated, and the official text remains authoritative.


From the case law to a strategy

A case law database orients, it does not decide. Reading a line of decisions reveals neither the strength of a patent, nor the weight of an evidentiary record, nor the forum in which to sue. That work, at the crossing of the record, the calendar and procedure, is what the firm carries out before the Unified Patent Court and the Paris Judicial Court.

Three services naturally extend this page: a second opinion on pending patent litigation, litigation readiness and the role of French correspondent counsel for patents and the UPC.


Frequently asked questions

What does UPC Litigation Watch contain?

Decisions and orders of the Unified Patent Court since the Court opened on 1 June 2023, summarised and indexed by court, division, type of action and topic. The database distinguishes entries with a reviewed summary from entries whose metadata alone have been verified.

How is the database updated?

New decisions published by the Court are added at each check of the register, at least once a week. The date of the last decision added is shown at the top of the page. The most significant ones are discussed separately on the firm’s blog or at the Kluwer Patent Blog.

Can a summary support a litigation decision?

No. The entries guide research. Only the official text of the decision is authoritative, and assessing a dispute requires an analysis of the record. For that, contact the firm.

Contact us

The firm represents clients before the Unified Patent Court and the French courts. For a question about a decision or pending proceedings, write to contact@dhenne-avocats.fr.


Receive our articles and litigation updates

One newsletter a week, only when there is something new in the sections you choose, with a link to each article, each case note and the official source.

Sections (one or more)
Newsletter language

You will receive an e-mail asking you to confirm. Every newsletter includes a link to change your choices and an unsubscribe link.

Already subscribed: the “Manage my preferences” link appears at the bottom of every newsletter.


Resources

Resources of the UPC space

Beyond the decisions, the texts they rest on, the vocabulary of the field and the firm’s pages devoted to the Court.