Pirelli Tyre v Tianjin Kingtyre Group (CFI, 26 May 2026)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By default decision of 26 May 2026 (UPC_CFI_771/2024), the Milan Local Division held that Tianjin Kingtyre Group, which did not appear after service of the statement of claim in China on 2 July 2025, infringed Pirelli Tyre’s patent EP 2 519 412 (motorcycle tyre) by presenting the K902 and GRADE W tyres at the EICMA fair in November 2024 and on its website.

Question

On what conditions may a decision by default find infringement of a method claim and order corrective measures?

Decision

The division checks that service complied with the 1965 Hague Convention (paragraphs 12 to 14). Rule 171.2 RoP on uncontested facts does not apply to a defaulting party: facts must be proven, but validity is not examined of the court’s own motion (paragraphs 16, 17 and 21). Literal infringement of claims 3 and 1 is established from the website and the seized brochures. For the method claim, the presumption of Article 55(2) UPCA operates in the proprietor’s favour (paragraphs 31 to 34). The operative part finds infringement, grants an injunction for the States where the patent has effect, sets penalty payments of EUR 400 per tyre and EUR 5,000 per day of delay in publishing a notice on its website, awards costs capped at EUR 56,000 and sets the value of the case at EUR 500,000. For lack of proof of actual sales, recall, destruction, disclosure of information and an interim award of damages are refused (paragraphs 39, 40 and 44).

Key points for practice

• Default is not an admission: the claimant must prove the facts, but the patent’s validity is not raised of the court’s own motion.
• Practical point: a seizure at a trade fair proves the offer and supports an injunction, but without proof of sales the claimant obtains no recall, destruction or information on distribution channels.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts. 25(a), 55(2), 63, 64, 67, 68, 69(1) and 80

Statute of the Court

Art. 37

Rules of Procedure

Rules 23, 119, 171.2, 354.3 and 355

Case law cited

Dexcom v Abbott, Paris Local Division, 30 January 2024, Morello Forni v Gastroteam, Milan Local Division, 19 November 2025

Related decisions

• Pirelli Tyre v Tianjin Kingtyre, 5 November 2024, seizure ordered before the action on the merits.
• Pirelli Tyre, 15 July 2025, settlement with the German distributor confirmed.
• Pirelli Tyre v Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber, 26 May 2026, parallel case on another tyre patent.

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.