Decisions of the Unified Patent Court recorded under "Costs" in UPC Litigation Watch, the case law database maintained by Dhenne Avocats.
UPC decisions and orders since 1 June 2023. “Decision with commentary” means the entry contains an analysis by Dhenne Avocats. “Summary available” identifies a summary; “Reference” identifies a record without a detailed case note. Open the entry for the source and, where available, the facts, reasoning and practical implications. The official decision is authoritative.
Combinable filters, search within the records or the full text of the decisions, copy reference, selection and export. The keyword and reference search above remains available.
60 decisions recorded
In an order of 3 November 2026 (UPC_CoA_84/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal grants Yealink partial leave to appeal the cost decision of the Brussels Local Division of 7 May 2026.
Read the analysisIn a procedural order of 30 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1646/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division dismisses Rakuten’s application for Helios Streaming to provide EUR 200,000 as security for costs.
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_169/2026 to UPC_CoA_172/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed Hybridgenerator’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the costs decision of the Copenhagen Local Division of 17 September 2026, which ordered…
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_169/2026 to UPC_CoA_172/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed Hybridgenerator’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the costs decision of the Copenhagen Local Division of 17 September 2026, which ordered…
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_169/2026 to UPC_CoA_172/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed Hybridgenerator’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the costs decision of the Copenhagen Local Division of 17 September 2026, which ordered…
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_169/2026 to UPC_CoA_172/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed Hybridgenerator’s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the costs decision of the Copenhagen Local Division of 17 September 2026, which ordered…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 27 October 2026, issued in German (UPC_CFI_714/2025, UPC_CFI_3019/2026 and UPC_CFI_3020/2026, EP 4 283 140), the Munich Central Division rules on cross-applications for cost assessment following the decision of 21 July 2026 that partially revoked the patent and allocated…
Read the analysisIn an order of 27 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_71/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal orders the reimbursement of EUR 61,150 to Qualcomm. Qualcomm had paid EUR 90,300, the amount displayed by the CMS, for its cross-appeal against the Munich Local Division’s…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 23 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_706/2025), the Mannheim Local Division dismissed SK nexilis’ action against three Volta Energy Solutions companies for infringement of EP 3 316 363, which concerns an electrolytic copper foil for a secondary battery.
Read the analysisBy a decision of 22 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_52/2025, counterclaim for revocation UPC_CFI_67/2025), Panel 2 of the Düsseldorf Local Division dismisses the action brought by CUP&CINO Kaffeesystem-Vertrieb GmbH & Co.
Read the analysisIn a decision of 20 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_481/2025 and UPC_CFI_1358/2025), the Mannheim Local Division, hearing Huawei’s action for infringement of EP 3 667 981 against HMD Global and a counterclaim for revocation, held that the asserted claims were not entitled to the…
Read the analysisBy an order of 19 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1209/2025, counterclaim for revocation UPC_CFI_731/2026), Matthias Zigann, presiding judge of Panel 1a of the Munich Local Division acting as judge-rapporteur, closes the interim procedure in the action brought by Steindl Krantechnik Gesellschaft m.b.H.
Read the analysisBy an order of 19 October 2026, published in the infringement action (UPC_CFI_806/2025) and in the counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_185/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Brussels Local Division, Samuel Granata, closes the interim procedure in the dispute between Barco N.V.
Read the analysisBy an order of 16 October 2026 following the interim conference (Rule 105.5 RoP), the judge-rapporteur of the Lisbon Local Division, in the dispute between Illumina, Inc.
Read the analysisThis entry corresponds to appeal UPC_CoA_89/2026, decided by the order of 13 October 2026 of the standing judge of the Court of Appeal. The application for leave to appeal against the Mannheim Local Division’s order of 22 May 2026, which had rejected…
Read the analysisBy an order of 13 October 2026, issued under UPC_CoA_88/2026 and UPC_CoA_89/2026, the UPC Court of Appeal, sitting as a single permanent judge, refused Rematec’s application for leave to appeal against the order of the Mannheim Local Division of 22 May 2026.
Read the analysisThe Munich local division revokes the European part of Maxell’s patent for lack of novelty and dismisses the infringement action. The decision confirms that an auxiliary request drawn from the description does not escape an obviousness objection where it merely adds a…
Read the analysisBy an order under Rule 105.5 RoP issued after the interim conference, the judge-rapporteur closed the interim procedure and opened the oral procedure in the infringement action brought by KEEEX against Adobe, OpenAI, Truepic, Joint Development Foundation Projects and the C2PA entities,…
Read the analysisThe standing judge of the Court of Appeal refused Suinno leave to appeal, under Rule 221 RoP, the cost decision of the Paris Central Division of 31 March 2026, which had awarded Microsoft EUR 300,000 out of a claimed EUR 360,940.60 following…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 27 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_60/2026), the presiding judge and rapporteur of the Court of Appeal allows, by analogy with Rule 265.1 RoP, the withdrawal of the application for the determination of costs (Rule 151) filed the same day by…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 10 April 2026 (UPC_CFI_1110/2025 and UPC_CFI_1111/2025), in German, the Düsseldorf Local Division assesses the costs owed by Seoul Viosys to expert e-Commerce and expert klein following the Court of Appeal's judgment of 2 October 2025, which had set…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 9 April 2026 (UPC_CFI_1477/2025), in German, the Düsseldorf Local Division sets at EUR 50,450.52 the appeal costs owed by Seoul Viosys to expert e-Commerce and expert klein, after the Court of Appeal dismissed, on 5 November 2025, Seoul…
Read the analysisIn an order of 30 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_302/2025 and UPC_CoA_305/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal dismisses Rematec's request to refer its cost-fixing application to the Mannheim Local Division with an instruction that the Court of Appeal filing date count as…
Read the analysisIn an order of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_889/2025), the Court of Appeal set aside the orders of the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_114/2025) requiring Syntorr, a Cypriot company and proprietor of EP 3 835 470, to provide EUR 2,000,000 as security for costs…
Read the analysisBy order of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_890/2025), the Court of Appeal, on discretionary review, set aside the Munich Local Division's orders requiring Syntorr, claimant in an infringement action on EP 2 670 898 against three Arthrex companies, to provide security for costs…
Read the analysisIn an order of 10 February 2026 (UPC_CFI_1738/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Local Division stayed the cost application brought by AWM s.r.l. and Schnell s.p.a. against Progress Maschinen & Automation AG until the Court of Appeal rules on the appeal against…
Read the analysisBy an order of 13 January 2026, the full panel of the Munich Local Division granted Heraeus Electronics re-establishment of rights in the one-month period under Rule 151.1 for starting cost-assessment proceedings, following the decision on the merits of 10 October 2025…
Read the analysisIn an order of 5 January 2026 (UPC_CFI_730/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division assessed the costs that Nera Innovations must reimburse to the Xiaomi companies for the unsuccessful appeal on service of the statement of claim (UPC_CoA_205/2024).
Read the analysisThe standing judge of the Court of Appeal refuses Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy leave to appeal the decision of 6 November 2025 in which the Paris Central Division (UPC_CFI_724/2025) set at EUR 350,000 the costs owed to Microsoft Corporation…
Read the analysisIn an order of 19 December 2025, made in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_622/2025 and UPC_CoA_623/2025, the Court of Appeal ordered Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump, an appellant based in China, to provide security of EUR 75,000 per appeal in favour of Grundfos…
Read the analysisBy an order of 11 November 2025 (UPC_CFI_879/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division allowed Faro Technologies to withdraw its application for the assessment of costs against Blankenhorn, following proceedings UPC_CFI_500/2025 (EP 4 001 835).
Read the analysisBy order of 30 October 2025 (UPC_CoA_8/2025, proceedings in Italian, EP 2 145 848), the Court of Appeal ruled on the application for security for costs brought by Oerlikon Textile, the respondent, against Bhagat Textile Engineers, the appellant found to infringe by…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 15 October 2025, the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Central Division assessed the recoverable costs payable by EOFLOW to Insulet following the decision on the merits of 22 July 2025 (proceedings UPC_CFI_773/2025 and UPC_CFI_774/2025, patent EP 4 201 327).
Read the analysisIn an order of 20 August 2025 (UPC_CoA_380/2025), a single judge of the Court of Appeal refused expert e-Commerce and expert klein leave to appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division’s decision holding their application for a cost decision against Seoul Viosys to…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 31 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_382/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Central Division ruled on the costs claimed by Novartis from ZENTIVA K.S. and ZENTIVA PORTUGAL following the dismissal, on 21 March 2025, of their application to intervene in an…
Read the analysisBy order of 25 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_131/2025), Judge Granata, judge-rapporteur of the Brussels Local Division, ordered the defendant, an individual whose name is redacted, to pay OrthoApnea and VIVISOL B EUR 41,656.64 for the first-instance costs of the infringement action on EP…
Read the analysisBy order of 22 July 2025 (UPC_CoA_845/2024), the Court of Appeal allowed Koninklijke Philips to withdraw the application for a cost decision against Belkin that it had lodged with the Court of Appeal by mistake on 2 July 2025, and declared the…
Read the analysisBy 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…
Read the analysisBy order of 3 July 2025, the standing judge of the Court of Appeal rejects Tiroler Rohre’s appeal against the Munich Local Division judge-rapporteur’s order of 10 February 2025, which had ordered it to reimburse EUR 84,033.76 in costs to SSAB Swedish…
Read the analysisOn OrthoApnea and Vivisol's application for EUR 92,814.62 in costs following their success in the infringement action on EP 2 331 036 against an individual defendant (UPC_CFI_131/2025), the judge rapporteur Granata (Brussels Local Division) stayed the costs proceedings until the Court of…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 22 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_16/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division ordered Ortovox Sportartikel to reimburse EUR 4,866.11 in costs to Mammut Sports Group AG and Mammut Sports Group GmbH, rather than the EUR 9,732.21 claimed, following the…
Read the analysisBy decision of 14 April 2025 (ACT_66999/2024 and ACT_67004/2024, UPC_CFI_483/2023 and counterclaim CC_3555/2024), Presiding Judge Thomas, acting as judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division, rejected as inadmissible the application by expert e-Commerce and expert klein to fix costs of EUR 111,000.
Read the analysisBy decision of 14 April 2025 (ACT_60376/2024, UPC_CFI_363/2023 and UPC_CFI_677/2024), Presiding Judge Thomas, acting as judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division, fixed the costs owed to Seoul Viosys following the decision of 10 October 2024, which had upheld the infringement action on…
Read the analysisBy decision of 4 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_697/2024, ORD_68336/2024), Judge-rapporteur Rute Lopes of the Lisbon Local Division ruled on the costs application of AsusTek Computer, Arvato Netherlands and Digital River Ireland following the dismissal, on 15 October 2024, of Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson's application…
Read the analysisBy decision of 19 March 2025 (UPC_CFI_696/2024), Judge Voß, presiding judge and rapporteur of the Munich Local Division, ordered MSG Maschinenbau to pay EJP Maschinen EUR 33,224.50 within 21 days in costs of the infringement action on EP 3 225 320, withdrawn…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 10 February 2025 (UPC_CFI_640/2024, ACT_59020/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division (Judge Pichlmaier) set at EUR 84,033.76 the first-instance costs that Tiroler Rohre must reimburse to SSAB Swedish Steel and SSAB Europe Oy by 15 March 2025,…
Read the analysisBy order of 9 January 2025 (UPC_CoA_611/2024), the Court of Appeal ordered that 60% of the court fees for the appeal be refunded to DISH Technologies and Sling TV, who had lodged and then withdrawn an appeal against the Mannheim Local Division…
Read the analysis