UPC CFI, LD Hamburg, 14 August 2025: on international jurisdiction (incl. Spain) and acting as infringer or intermediary

Preliminary injunction (Article 62 UPCA, R. 211 RoP). International jurisdiction UPC including Spain (for Defendants 2 and 3). UPC has international jurisdiction with respect to Defendants 2) and 3) as they are domiciled in Germany (Article 4(1) BR). This extends to the territories of the Contracting Member States of the UPCA for which the European patent is in effect (including Spain). With respect to Defendants 1) and 3) the UPC has also jurisdiction to decide upon the infringement as far as it relates to acts infringing the Spanish national part of the patent-in-suit.  The UPC has international jurisdiction for all patent infringements committed in a UPC member state, regardless of the Defendant's place of residence (Article 7(2) BR).The jurisdiction granted by Art. 7 (2) BR [Defendant 1] is not limited to the Member State as according to Art. 34 UPCA Decisions of the Court shall cover, in the case of a European patent, the territory of those Contracting Member States for which the European patent is in effect. The international jurisdiction with respect to Defendant 4) follows Art. 8(1) BR. No plausible allegation of infringing acts by Defendants 2 and 4  in Spain.  the Applicant did not provide any reliable facts that Defendant 2) is or was involved in any marketing of the attacked embodiments in Spain. The same applies to Defendant 4). Defendant 3) is subject to the universal jurisdiction of the UPC at its seat, including alleged infringing acts with respect to the Spanish national part of the patent in suit. As Authorized Representative” pursuant to the EU regulations 2023/988/EU on general product safety (GPSR) and 2019/1020/EU on market surveillance and compliance of products, Defendants 3 is an essential party in the distribution in the EU. Without an authorized representative in the EU, Defendant 1) is not legally able to sale the attacked embodiments in the EU. Defendant 3 serves as an anchor defendant for the international jurisdiction with respect of Defendant 1) regarding the Spanish national part of the patent, if the criteria of Art. 8 (1) BR are met. Defendants 1, 2 and 3 are infringers in the UPCA countries and Spain (Defendant 1) or only in the UPCA countries (Defendants 2 and 4) (Article 25 UPCA, Article 62 UPCA). Defendant 1) is liable for the patent infringement in the UPCA countries and in Spain as it is the producer and website operator in European countries and thereby inter alia offering the products […]. Defendant 2) is liable as the Germany based “Official Distributor of Dreame” and seller. Its liability is limited to UPCA countries as the Court has no jurisdiction regarding the infringement of the Spanish national part of the patent in suit. The same applies to Defendant 4), who is the Swedish affiliate to Defendant 1) and runs the country specific website www.se.dreamtech.com as well as a retail store in Stockholm. As authorized representative Defendant 3 is an intermediary whose services are essential for the distribution of the attacked embodiments in the European Union, including Spain (Article 62 UPCA, Article 9(1)(a) Enforcement directive).