GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals v Pfizer Europe MA EEIG (CFI, 4 March 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By procedural order of 4 March 2025 (UPC_CFI_468/2024 and UPC_CFI_687/2024, ACT_45141/2024, CC_60908/2024), the Düsseldorf Local Division (Thomas, presiding, Schumacher, rapporteur, and Postiglione) referred to the Milan Central Division the counterclaim for revocation brought by Pfizer group companies against GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals’ EP 4 183 412, together with the application to amend the patent, and proceeded with the infringement action.

Question

Should the local division keep the counterclaim, refer it to the Central Division already seised of a revocation action and, if so, stay the infringement action?

Decision

Art. 33(3) UPCA leaves the division three options (section I.1). Despite the advantages of hearing both together, the Division chose referral, which all parties sought: the revocation action before the Central Division and the counterclaim rest largely on the same prior art and grounds, the Central Division already knows the subject matter, and the referral covers all counterclaimants (section I.2). No stay is ordered at this stage, since a high likelihood of invalidity can only be assessed after a full review of the file. The point may be revisited (section I.3). The time limit for the rejoinder is extended by one month, to 13 April 2025, rather than the two months sought, under Rule 9.3(a), the bifurcation decision having come shortly before the deadline (section II). The proposal to limit the pleadings to the patent as granted is rejected (section III).

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a revocation action pending before the Central Division on the same prior art favours referral of the counterclaim, without any automatic stay of the infringement action.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 33(3)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9.3(a), 37.2 and 37.4

Case law cited

Amgen v Sanofi, Munich Local Division, 2 February 2024, MED-EL v Advanced Bionics, Mannheim Local Division, 10 July 2024, Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce, Düsseldorf Local Division, 20 January 2024

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.