IQIP v TMS Technical & Maritime Supplies (CFI, UPC_CFI_721/2025, 29 April 2026)
| Date | 29 April 2026 |
|---|---|
| Court | CFI |
| Division | The Hague (NL) Local Division |
| Type of action | Infringement Action |
| Case number(s) | UPC_CFI_721/2025 |
| Registry reference | UPC-CFI-721/2025 |
| Parties | IQIP Holding B.V. v. TMS Technical & Maritime Supplies B.V. |
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
In an order of 29 April 2026 in the infringement action UPC_CFI_721/2025 and the counterclaim UPC_CFI_1695/2025, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division partly grants TMS’s request for production of evidence under Rule 190 RoP. IQIP Holding and IQIP B.V. must produce the technical documentation of the plugs used in 2008 on the Rhyl Flats and Gunfleet Sands projects, relied on as public prior use against EP 2 148 123, under a confidentiality regime. Commercial documents are refused: the order shows the proportionality review applied to an overly broad request.
Question
To what extent must the patentee and a third-party group company produce evidence relating to a prior use alleged by the defendant?
Decision
The judge sets out the cumulative conditions of Article 59(1) UPCA and Rule 190.1 RoP (paragraphs 6 and 7). Since IQIP did not dispute TMS’s entitlement to the technical documents, their production, limited to seven listed features, is held proportionate and ordered within two weeks, with leave to redact matters unrelated to the prior use (paragraphs 8 and 12). Documents whose existence or possession is disputed are excluded for lack of contrary evidence, and invoices or contracts become unnecessary since IQIP does not dispute delivery before the priority date (paragraphs 9, 10 and 22). The confidentiality regime proposed by IQIP, which was not contested, is ordered (paragraph 11), and an exchange of pleadings limited to the prior use is scheduled.
Key points for practice
- Practical point: a production request targeted at the technical features in dispute is more likely to succeed than one that also covers commercial documents, especially where the opponent does not dispute the delivery date.
Provisions applied
- Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
- Arts 41(3), 42 and 59(1)
- Rules of Procedure
- Rules 190.1, 190.7, 262 and 262A
- Directive 2004/48/EC
- Art. 3
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: Patent infringement action.
Publications by Matthieu Dhenne: Pleading the Long Arm: What a UPC Statement of Claim Must Carry Beyond Jurisdiction (Kluwer Patent Blog).
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
- claimantIQIP Holding B.V.2 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantTMS Technical & Maritime Supplies B.V.2 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Infringement Action
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- La production de la documentation technique sur les bouchons invoqués comme usage antérieur est ordonnée sous confidentialité, les pièces commerciales et les documents dont la détention est contestée étant refusés.
- Appeal
- No appeal documented in the corpus, this does not mean that no appeal was lodged.
- Instance
- First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.
Patents mentioned
EP 2 148 123mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent
Related decisions cited in the analyses
- IQIP v TMS Technical & Maritime Supplies (CFI, UPC_CFI_1695/2025, 29 April 2026) cites this decision
Patents and standards
| Publication | Role in the dispute | Family | Standard and declaration | Pool | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EP 2 148 123 | Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) | not recorded | not recorded | not recorded | Espacenet links not checked mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis |
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.