Meril Life Sciences v Edwards Lifesciences (CFI, 11 December 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By a procedural order of 11 December 2024 (UPC_CFI_380/2023, ACT_582093/2023), the Nordic-Baltic Regional Division, reconsidering the matter after remittal by the Court of Appeal, dismissed the request by Meril Life Sciences Pvt Limited and five other defendants to stay Edwards Lifesciences Corporation’s action for infringement of EP3769722 pending EPO opposition proceedings. The oral hearing of 16 January 2025 was maintained, the day before the Opposition Division’s hearing, whose outcome will be sought at the hearing.

Question

Should proceedings be stayed, or the hearing postponed, where the EPO Opposition Division is to decide, in accelerated proceedings, the day after the UPC hearing?

Decision

A stay is assessed under Rule 295(a) and Art. 33(10) UPCA, which allow it where a rapid EPO decision is expected. Avoiding conflicting UPC and EPO decisions is a good reason, and the Opposition Division’s preliminary opinion relies on grounds similar to those of the counterclaim for revocation. However, the target of an oral hearing within one year of the action, started in October 2023, will already not be met, and postponement could delay the decision further. Since the Opposition Division usually decides orally at the end of its hearing, its outcome will be known before the decision on the merits, and an appeal against it can be expected. Weighing the parties’ interests, the panel kept the hearing date, dismissed the stay and will ask the parties to report the outcome of the opposition.

Key points for practice

• An imminent EPO decision does not in itself justify a stay where the UPC proceedings have already overrun their target timetable.
• Practical point: the division may take account of the opposition outcome by asking the parties to report it, without suspending the proceedings.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 33(3)(a) and (10)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 105.5 and 295(a)

Case law cited

Meril Life Sciences v Edwards Lifesciences, Court of Appeal, 21 November 2024 (UPC_CoA_511/2024)

Related decisions

• Meril Life Sciences v Edwards Lifesciences, 21 November 2024, Court of Appeal order remitting the stay request for reconsideration.

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.