Applicant *** (CoA, UPC_CoA_521/2025, 24 July 2025)
| Date | 24 July 2025 |
|---|---|
| Court | CoA |
| Division | Luxembourg (LU) |
| Type of action | Petition for review of Registrar's decision |
| Case number(s) | UPC_CoA_521/2025 |
| Registry reference | APL_28067/2025 · ORD_33655/2025 · UPC_CoA_521/2025 |
| Parties | Applicant *** |
Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry
Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.
Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026
Our analysis
Summary
By an order of 24 July 2025 (UPC_CoA_521/2025), the President of the Court of Appeal rejected a petition by a European patent attorney, whose name is redacted, against the Registrar’s decision of 12 May 2025 refusing his entry on the list of representatives. His request, filed on 27 March 2025, relied on a 2023 certificate from an Italian industrial property course, which could count only under the one-year transitional period that ended on 3 June 2024. The order rules out late requests based on these transitional qualifications.
Question
Can a certificate falling under Rule 12.1(a) of the Rules on the European Patent Litigation Certificate support an entry requested after the transitional period has ended?
Decision
No. The course, which predates the accreditation of 19 July 2024, counts only as an « other qualification » under Rule 12.1(a)(xii), recognised for the transitional period alone (paragraphs 11 and 12). That period defines how long the certificate is deemed valid, not when it must have been obtained. The opposite reading would deprive Rule 12.2 of effect, so the request must be filed within that period (paragraphs 13 to 16). The scheme does not breach equality or proportionality, and the applicant can still qualify through the European Patent Litigation Certificate or a law degree (paragraphs 17 and 18). A one-off oversight by his team does not justify re-establishment: the applicable rules provide for none, do not refer to Rule 320 RoP, and due care was not shown (paragraphs 19 to 23).
Key points for practice
- The transitional period under Rule 12.1(a) is, as a rule, not open to extension or exception. An attorney who did not register in time must obtain the European Patent Litigation Certificate.
Provisions applied
- Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
- Art. 48(2)
- Rules of Procedure
- Rules 286.2 and 320
- European Patent Convention
- Art. 134
- Other provisions
- Rules on the European Patent Litigation Certificate and other appropriate qualifications, Rules 2, 11, 12 and 14
Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.
Going further
Lexicon: UPC Court of Appeal.
Dhenne Avocats blog: UPC Appeals: What the Numbers Show.
Source and translations
- Official source
- Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
- Original language
- not recorded
- Translation available
- no translation recorded the firm’s French record is a summary, not a translation
- Date checked
- not recorded
Follow this case
Proceedings, related decisions, appeals, parties and patents as recorded in the registry and in the Dhenne Avocats corpus. Each link states its source.
Parties
- claimantApplicant ***11 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Petition for review of Registrar's decision
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- Le recours est rejeté : le certificat invoqué ne valait qu'au titre de la période transitoire, expirée avant la demande d'inscription, et aucune restitution n'est possible.
- Appeal
- Decision of the Court of Appeal.
- Instance
- Court of Appeal decision.
Receive an alert
Weekly summary of new records and substantive updates matching what you follow. Address confirmed by email, unsubscribe at any time, one email per week even where several of your follows match.