MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte v Zhejiang Nurotron Biotechnology (CFI, 25 August 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 25 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_688/2025, ORD_35448/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division (Judge Johansson) refused to allow MED-EL’s statement of claim in its infringement action concerning EP 4 074 373 to be served on Zhejiang Nurotron Biotechnology through the lawyer who had represented it in the earlier provisional measures proceedings (UPC_CFI_514/2025). Service must instead follow the Hague Service Convention. The order confirms that authority to represent does not carry over from one set of proceedings to another, even linked ones, which lengthens the timetable against a defendant based outside the Contracting Member States.

Question

May the statement of claim be served on a defendant based in China through its representative in the provisional measures proceedings?

Decision

No. Art. 48(1) UPCA and Rule 8.1 do not require a defendant to be represented by the same lawyer in all proceedings. A representative authorised in provisional measures proceedings is not automatically authorised for the subsequent infringement action, and the judge distinguished the Mannheim Local Division order relied on by the claimant (paragraph 8). Since the defendant’s statutory seat, central administration and principal place of business are outside the Contracting Member States, service falls under Rule 274(a)(ii) and must be attempted under the Hague Service Convention (paragraph 9). Service already effected on Nurotron Global is unaffected (paragraph 10).

Key points for practice

• A claimant that has obtained provisional measures against a defendant based outside the EU cannot rely on the defendant’s lawyer in those proceedings to accept service of the main action. It should plan for the time the Hague Service Convention takes.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 48(1)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 8.1, 274 and 333.1

Other provisions

Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters

Case law cited

InterDigital VC v The Walt Disney, Mannheim Local Division, 9 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_445/2025), distinguished, Court of Appeal, 5 August 2024 (UPC_CoA_183/2024), cited in the preliminary order of 1 August 2025

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.