Hurom v NUC Electronics (CFI, ORD_11863/2025, 11 March 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By a decision of 11 March 2025 (UPC_CFI_162/2024), the Mannheim Local Division ruled on Hurom’s infringement action (EP 2 028 981, juice extractor) against the Korean company NUC Electronics Co., parent of the NUC group, concerning the « AUTO10 » juicer. Running in parallel with the case against the European subsidiaries, the decision finds that every feature of claim 1 is implemented, holds the requests concerning Turkey inadmissible and clarifies how Art. 26 of Regulation 1215/2012 interacts with Rule 19.7. It held that handing over products to distributors outside UPC territory, for distribution within it, is the parent company’s own infringing act, and granted an injunction for five States, corrective measures and information.

Facts and procedure

Hurom has been registered as proprietor of the Danish and German parts since 18 September 2019 and of the Dutch part since 30 March 2020 (paragraph 1). The defendant, based in Korea, lists subsidiaries and distributors in Germany and France on its website (paragraph 3). After the hearing of 28 January 2025, the requests concerning Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom were separated on 11 March 2025 pending the consequences of BSH Hausgeräte (paragraphs 7 and 45).

The applicable law

The requests concerning Turkey are inadmissible, since no act committed in the UPC territory and linked to that state was alleged. Art. 71b(3) of Regulation 1215/2012 does not confer jurisdiction either (paragraphs 43, 46 and 47). Art. 26 of the Regulation prevails over Rule 19.7 in determining when a jurisdictional objection must be raised (paragraph 48). Art. 3(c) UPCA founds jurisdiction over acts before 1 June 2023 (paragraph 50) and the local division is competent under Art. 33(1)(a) (paragraph 51).

Question

Can the UPC hear requests concerning the Turkish part of the patent against a Korean defendant, and which law governs acts that began before 1 June 2023?

Decision

Not for Turkey, absent any link to an act committed in the UPC territory (paragraphs 46 and 47). The requests are sufficiently specific without a model number (paragraph 52) and Hurom’s ownership is established, the register entry being indicative and the challenge to the 2018 assignment lacking specificity (paragraphs 53 to 58). Claim 1 does not require an inlet port projecting above the cover, a waterproof cylinder integral with the housing or protection against vertical lifting (paragraphs 62 to 80), the AUTO10 implements all of its features (paragraphs 82 to 90). Arts 25 to 28 UPCA apply to acts after 1 June 2023, including for classic European patents, without breaching non-retroactivity (paragraphs 95 to 98), earlier acts are governed by national law alone (paragraphs 99 to 104), continuing acts fall under the Agreement, subject to more favourable national law that the party must establish, the division not investigating national law of its own motion (paragraph 105). On the acts, who counts as a perpetrator is a matter for an autonomous interpretation of the Agreement: Art. 25 UPCA does not require the defendant’s own acts within UPC territory, and handing over the products in Korea to distributors selling them in Europe gives the defendant control over the infringement (paragraph 109). Acts in Denmark, Italy and the Netherlands were taken as admitted for want of specific denial, Art. 34 UPCA being unable by itself to extend remedies (paragraphs 110 to 113). The division declared that claim 1 was infringed and granted an injunction for Germany, Denmark, France, Italy and the Netherlands, backed by a penalty of EUR 2,000 per unit, excluding mere exporting (paragraphs 115 to 118). Entitlement to damages was recognised without any prior warning. Moral damages and an interim award of EUR 30,000 were refused (paragraphs 119 to 124). Information extends to the defendant’s own manufacturing outside UPC territory (paragraph 126). Destruction, recall from commercial customers and removal were ordered, and publication was refused (paragraphs 129 to 134). An interim award of costs of EUR 56,000 was granted, no security was required since both parties are domiciled in the same country, the defendant bears the costs and the value in dispute was set at EUR 675,000 (paragraphs 135 to 140).

Key points for practice

• A request concerning a non-Contracting State requires a link to an act committed in the UPC territory. Art. 71b(3) of Regulation 1215/2012 is not enough.
• The timing of an objection to international jurisdiction is governed by Art. 26 of Regulation 1215/2012, which prevails over Rule 19.7.
• A foreign manufacturer that hands over its products to distributors outside Europe for sale within UPC territory itself commits the infringement (paragraph 109).
• Practical point: a claimant should set out, for each state concerned, the acts committed and the basis of jurisdiction, and structure its requests by period around 1 June 2023.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts 3(c), 25 to 28, 33(1)(a), 34, 42, 57, 63, 64, 67, 68, 69, 72, 80 and 82

Rules of Procedure

Rules 13.1, 19.7, 118.5, 118.8, 119, 125, 150.2, 171.2, 191 and 262A

European Patent Convention

Art. 142, Art. 149a

Directive 2004/48/EC

Arts 3(2) and 10

Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012

Arts 26 and 71b(3)

Other provisions

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Case law cited

Panasonic v OPPO, Mannheim Local Division, 22 November 2024, Düsseldorf Local Division, 3 July 2024 (UPC_CFI_7/2023), Düsseldorf Local Division, 31 October 2024 (UPC_CFI_373/2023), CJEU, 25 February 2025, BSH Hausgeräte, C-339/22

Related decisions

• Hurom v NUC Electronics, Mannheim Local Division, 11 March 2025, order separating Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom
• Hurom v NUC Electronics Europe, Mannheim Local Division, 11 March 2025, parallel decision against the European subsidiaries

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.