UPC case insights

This information provides metrics on not only the number of cases being filed for respective actions, but also on which forums are being used for which types of actions, the language of proceedings used, and the subject-matter being contested.

 

The most recent update indicates that, to date, there have been 341 actions filed at the UPC’s Court of First Instance within the last year, with the vast majority of these actions relating to infringement actions (123), revocation actions (32), provisional measures (24) such as injunctions, and counterclaims for revocations (153). It is noted that the value for counterclaims for revocations is misleadingly large as each defendant in an infringement case needs to file an individual claim for revocation, so the number of counterclaims for revocations increases with the number of defendants in a single action. These 153 counterclaims for revocations come from 54 individual infringement actions. The below spreadsheet illustrates how the cumulative totals for these action numbers have changed since the UPC started publishing this data:

 

Month	Infringement actions	Revocation actions	Provisional measures	Applications for preserving evidence	Order for inspection	Action for damages	Declaration of non-infringement	Counterclaim for Revocation	Total
Apr-24	123	32	24	5	1	1	2	153	341
Mar-24	110	28	22	5	1	1	1	142	311
Feb-24	96	24	17	5	1	1	1	129	274
Jan-24	83	24	16	5	1	1	1	86	217
Dec-23	67	24	13	5	1	1	1	48	160

 

 

As expected, German courts are the venue of choice for most actions, although France’s appearance as the most popular venue for revocation proceedings was surprising. It is possible that this is linked to different types of actions being pursued by companies operating in different technology fields, as patents in International Patent Classification (IPC) sections A, B, D, E, G, and H are commonly assigned to the Central Division in Paris, while actions in the Central Division relating to patents in IPC sections C and F are handled by the Central Division in Munich.

 

An IPC Section broadly indicates the subject-matter of the actions, and are as follows: .

• A = Human necessities.
• B = Performing operations; transporting.
• C = Chemistry; metallurgy.
• D = Textiles; paper.
• E = Fixed constructions.
• F = Mechanical engineering; lighting; heating; weapons; blasting.
• G = Physics.
• H = Electricity.

 

The most recent update further includes the following Figure, which illustrates variances in the types of actions filed for different IPC classes.

From this, it appears that subject-matter relating to electric engineering (such as semi-conductor-based technology), computing, and telecoms are some of the early initial filers. Perhaps surprising is the appearance in second place of biotech companies, as it was initially believed that such companies would be even more hesitant to use the UPC over more traditional courts. Seeing how these IPC section and action distributions change over time may provide some early indications of the level of confidence different technology areas have in litigating cases before the UPC.

 

This briefing is for general information purposes only and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice relating to your particular circumstances. We can discuss specific issues and facts on an individual basis. Please note that the law may have changed since the day this was first published in May 2024.