Patent owners not rushing out of the upcoming Unified Patent Court

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Patent owners not rushing out of the upcoming Unified Patent Court

Sponsored by

twobirds-400px.jpg
business-3188128.jpg

Early predictions that most European patent holders would opt out of the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court have proved wide of the mark, report Henri Kaikkonen and Wouter Pors of Bird & Bird

The single most remarkable reform in the European patent landscape is imminent, as the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and the unitary patent (UP) system will come into force on June 1 2023.

The UPC will have jurisdiction not only over UPs but also over traditional European patents (EPs) unless they are opted out. Opt-outs may be filed already during the so-called sunrise period to ensure that the EP will not become subject to a day one central revocation action at the UPC, which could nullify the EP throughout all 17 European countries that will participate in the UPC system from its introduction.

While it was previously predicted that most of the EPs would be opted out due to the perceived uncertainty of the new court system and the risk of a central revocation action, the industry’s view has changed, and the number of opt-outs has been limited.

Influential factors for patent holders

The UPC’s Rules of Procedure form a solid basis for litigation for patent owners. An important step was the appointment of legally qualified judges, whose views are known from the case law of their national courts. The UPC aims to issue judgments within a year, covering countries where national courts are less experienced in complex patent litigation.

While the risk of central revocation remains, the advantage of a central infringement action that covers a market of over 300 million consumers is compelling. Only just over approximately 30,000 opt-outs have been registered, whereas, for example, in Germany alone the total number of patents in force in 2022 was over 900,000.

Furthermore, some EP owners may be following a wait-and-see strategy, meaning that they opt out now but might opt back in to the UPC.

An application to withdraw an opted-out EP is possible at any time, provided that an action concerning the EP in question has not been brought before a national court and that all owners of the opted-out EP so agree. Accordingly, if the patent owner prefers to wait and see, it is equally important to discuss the question of opting back in with other co-owners before making the final decision of opting out.

Another issue that might have caused some patent owners to stay within the UPC is that opt-outs are publicly searchable at the UPC’s registry.

Accordingly, the act of opting out might disclose strategic information about the value or strength of the EP, or about the likely enforcement activities of the patent owner. Of course, any such speculation may turn out to be false, but the act of opting out (or not) might trigger third parties to initiate national actions to ensure that the EP in question cannot be litigated before the UPC, which leads to the failure of any wait-and-see strategy.

With the sunrise period drawing to a close, European patent owners would do well to ensure that their UPC strategies are well planned and executed, and account for the most recent developments.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Judge Alan Albright is to leave his role at the Western District of Texas, and could return to private practice
Stobbs has successfully seen off a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
After almost a quarter of a century, Marshall Gerstein has a new managing partner
Abbott winning another round against Sinocare and Menarini, and 'long arm' clarification on the UK's position within the UPC, were also among major developments
Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Gift this article