Franz Kaldewei v Bette (CFI, 1 December 2023)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By procedural order of 1 December 2023 (UPC_CFI_7/2023, ORD_581034/2023), the Düsseldorf Local Division decided, after hearing the parties and before the close of the written procedure, to hear both Franz Kaldewei’s infringement action against Bette on EP 3 375 337 and the counterclaim for revocation, and instructed the judge-rapporteur to request the allocation of a technically qualified judge. The order shows that a local division may exercise the option in Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA at the very start of the proceedings.

Question

May the local division decide, before the written procedure closes, to hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation?

Decision

Yes. Rule 37.2 RoP allows an early decision provided the parties have been heard, and neither objected. Allocating the technical judge early avoids delays while the Court is in its start-up phase and some judges sit part-time. Joint handling by the same panel promotes efficiency and consistent claim construction. The technology is of moderate complexity and the number of invalidity attacks is manageable.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: parties should put forward their views on the Art. 33(3) UPCA options early, since the division may decide before the written procedure ends.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 33(3)(a)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 37.1 and 37.2

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.