Europe: UPC court fees announced

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

Europe: UPC court fees announced

At the end of February the Preparatory Committee for the Unified Patent Court announced the definitive proposal for court fees for the UPC, which is planned to start in early 2017.

The most striking change with respect to the previous proposal is that the costs for registering an opt-out are set to zero. The argument of the Preparatory Committee for doing so was, next to the many requests from the profession, that registration and checking for payment would complicate the opt-out procedure. This procedure now is a simple filling of the required data in the automated registration system of the Court.

The other fees of the Court follow the original proposal, to the effect that filing cases for infringement or declaration for non-infringement involve a fixed fee of €11,000 and a value-based fee that can vary between €0 and €325,000. The value of the case should be calculated in the simplest way, for example by reference to an appropriate licence fee. Filing a revocation action only is subject to a fixed fee of €20,000.

There will be a 40% reduction for SMEs or micro-entities if they meet certain criteria. Court fees may be partially reimbursed for simpler procedures, such as when cases are heard by one judge, withdrawn or settled.

The value of the case also determines the ceiling of the recoverable costs, which may be awarded to the winning party.

For both the recoverable costs and the court fees there is leeway for the court to adjust the levels to the nature of the parties. If and how the cost structure favours non-practising entities (patent trolls) is difficult to predict. Possibly, they inadvertently profit from the arrangements that are applicable to SMEs.

More details and a full disclosure of the complete cost structure can be found on the website of the Preparatory Committee unified-patent-court.org.

Bart van Wezenbeek


V.O.Johan de Wittlaan 72517 JR The HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Monetisation is standing at the forefront of patent development, and one firm says AI is increasingly being deployed
Data centres are being built across the US, prompting patent disputes, but Texas’s thriving tech industry and patent-ready courts make the state particularly ‘ripe’ for litigation
Carpmaels & Ransford is set to bolster its UK attorney team with the appointment of Simmons & Simmons’s head of IP in the UK
Updates on Nokia’s licensing strides and a surge in patent activity around battery recycling in Australia were also among the top talking points
To mark International Day Against Child Labour, Matteo Amerio at Corsearch says the people inside businesses who can identify counterfeiting risks must be given the tools and authority to act
With genuine equity at IP firms becoming rarer, securing partnership is harder than ever, but increased transparency is also making climbing the ladder more predictable
Yossi Sivan explains how Israeli judgment is a pro-brand owner departure from the norm and why it sends a strong message that corporate structures are not always a shield
Halim Shehadeh, group CEO of IP firm CWB, says that in the rush to discuss what AI can do, IP firms are overlooking the more important question of whether they are ready
Caitlin Heard, who formally joined the firm from CMS last month, says she is excited by the ‘energy’ of the London office
Ranjna Mehta-Dutt, who moved to Chadha & Chadha after 25 years at Remfry & Sagar, says the firm plans to expand its life sciences practice through targeted recruitment and dedicated teams for bigger clients
Gift this article