UPC Litigation Watch
Explore UPC and national routes for a patent dispute.
The orientation questionnaire starts from your situation and sets out the routes to examine, the conditions to check and the evidence to prepare. The database lists, without editorial selection, the decisions of the Unified Patent Court since it opened on 1 June 2023.
- Prepare my strategyA few questions on the patent, the countries and your objective. You get the routes to examine, their conditions and the documents to gather.Start →
- Understand an issueProvisional measures, evidence, jurisdiction, revocation, costs: a short explanation, then the decisions on point.Explore →
- Find a decisionDirect access to the database: parties, case number, division, topic.Open the database →
Maintained by Dhenne Avocats, a Paris firm dedicated to patent litigation · summaries written from the official decision · Scope and method
The database is updated every week, on Friday.
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.
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.
Enable JavaScript to use the questionnaire. The page’s analysis and sources remain accessible.
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
How does the Court assess infringement?
Decisions on the merits construe the claims, compare them with the product or process, then set the corrective measures and compensation.
Decisions: Infringement · Damages · Declaration of non-infringement
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
- procedural-order 609
- appeal 493
- infringement 472
- Brevets essentiels et FRAND 204
- access-to-file 164
- revocation 156
- provisional-measures 137
- Sciences de la vie et pharma 118
- settlement-withdrawal 117
- confidentiality 107
- jurisdiction-competence 53
- preliminary-objection 50
- evidence 49
- costs 41
- review-of-case-management 37
- preservation-of-evidence 32
- inspection 18
- registry-procedure 10
- decision-by-default 10
- unitary-patent-epo 5
- enforcement 4
- damages 3
- declaration-of-non-infringement 3
- admissibility 2
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
- An opt-out is not a register entry: ownership and procedural choice before the UPC (11 October 2026)
- Pleading the long arm: what a UPC statement of claim must carry (10 October 2026)
- Entering the European market: the four questions that decide the timetable (9 October 2026)
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
- Luxembourg (LU) 511
- Munich (DE) Local Division 424
- Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division 363
- Mannheim (DE) Local Division 198
- The Hague (NL) Local Division 147
- Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat 122
- Paris (FR) Local Division 104
- Milan (IT) Local Division 101
- Hamburg (DE) Local Division 100
- Munich (DE) Central Division - Section 53
- Brussels (BE) Local Division 53
- Milan (IT) Central Division- Section 47
- Nordic Baltic Regional Division 27
- Lisbon (PT) Local Division 23
- Helsinki (FI) Local Division 9
- Vienna (AT) Local Division 8
- Copenhagen (DK) Local Division 7
- Stockholm (SE) - Seat of the Regional Division 3
Latest decisions added
Beko Germany v Dolby International (CoA, UPC_CoA_78/2026, 9 October 2026)
Beko Germany v Dolby International (CoA, UPC_CoA_77/2026, 9 October 2026)
By decision of 9 October 2026 in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_77/2026 and UPC_CoA_78/2026, the Court of Appeal, following a settlement, permitted the withdrawal of Dolby International's infringement action (UPC_CFI_135/2024) and of the counterclaim for revocation brought by Beko Germany and Arçelik (UPC_CFI_477/2024)…
Esko-Graphics v In(k)control (CoA, UPC_CoA_73/2026, 8 October 2026)
By order of 8 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_73/2026), the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of Esko-Software and Esko-Graphics against the order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 27 April 2026 refusing to change the language of In(k)control's infringement…
TCL Europe v Corning (CoA, UPC_CoA_38/2026, 7 October 2026)
Inficon v Elitech Technology (CFI, UPC_CFI_137/2025, 6 October 2026)
By decision of 6 October 2026 in the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_137/2025 (infringement) and UPC_CFI_512/2025 (counterclaim for revocation), the Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed both Inficon's infringement action against Elitech Technology and Elitech UK, directed at the METRUM sniffing leak detector, and the counterclaim…
SharkNinja Operating v Groupe SEB France (CoA, UPC_CoA_61/2026, 5 October 2026)
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 Dhenne Avocats, a Paris litigation boutique devoted to patent disputes, under the direction of Matthieu Dhenne, PhD, attorney at the Paris Bar, UPC Representative and associate professor at University Paris-Panthéon-Assas. The author of a patent law treatise (LexisNexis, 2024) and of more than one hundred publications, he regularly comments on the Court’s case law at the Kluwer Patent Blog. Records distinguish documentary metadata from reviewed summaries. Their verification status is stated; 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.
One newsletter on Fridays: the week’s additions, with a link to each case note and to the official source.
Receive UPC Litigation Watch every week