Kodak Graphic Communications v FUJIFILM (CFI, 9 July 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By decision of 9 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_355/2023 and UPC_CFI_186/2025), the judge rapporteur Thomas (Düsseldorf Local Division) fixed the costs FUJIFILM must reimburse to the Kodak companies after EP 3 594 009 was revoked in its entirety and the infringement action dismissed on 28 January 2025. The amount awarded is redacted in the published version. The decision is mainly of interest for how it sorts the items of costs.

Question

Which representation, expert and procedural costs are recoverable within the ceiling set by the decision on the merits?

Decision

Costs must be reasonable and proportionate (Art. 69(1) UPCA). « Reasonable » essentially means « necessary », and proportionality takes account of the value in dispute, complexity and prospects of success (paragraphs 19 to 24). The ceiling of EUR 1.5 million, including a 25% increase, set in the decision on the merits is binding and cannot be reopened in the cost proceedings (paragraph 26). Two representatives attending the hearing and their travel costs are accepted (paragraph 27). Only one expert’s costs for specific computations are allowed, the other work not being objectively necessary (paragraphs 28 and 29). A barrister’s fees are refused, since the team already included three solicitors and there were no parallel UK proceedings (paragraph 30). Representation costs incurred in the cost proceedings themselves are not recoverable (paragraph 32). Payment is due within three weeks of service.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: each item, notably private expert work and additional counsel, must be justified by objective necessity, the ceiling cannot be reargued at the cost fixing stage.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 69(1) and (3)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 150 to 157 and 221.1

Scale of ceilings for recoverable costs

Art. 2(1)(b)

Case law cited

Munich Local Division, MSG Maschinenbau v EJP Maschinenbau, 19 March 2025, Düsseldorf Local Division, Seoul Viosys v expert, 14 April 2025, and Ortovox v Mammut, 22 April 2025, Court of Appeal, Hanshow v VusionGroup, 6 June 2025

Related decisions

• FUJIFILM v Kodak, 28 January 2025, decision on the merits revoking the patent and setting the costs ceiling.

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.