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 2025

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

AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
The keenly awaited ruling should act as a ‘call to arms’ for a much-needed evolution of UK copyright law, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
Gift this article