UPC CFI, LD Hamburg, 7 April 2026: International jurisdiction, preliminary injunction and costs
02-07-2026 Print this page
Patent valid and infringed. Preliminary injunction granted . (Article 25 UPCA, Article 65 UPCA, Article 62 UPCA, Rule 211 (1) RoP).
Jurisdiction and Competence (Article 4, Article 8 (1), Article 71 Brussels Regulation).
UPC has international jurisdiction under Article 4 Brussels for every defendant, who is based or domiciled within any Contracting Member State of the UPCA.
The UPC has international jurisdiction with respect to the Spanish defendant, as a “close connection” according to Article 8 (1) Brussels is established.
No international jurisdiction over the UK defendant regarding the UK part of patent (Article 8 Brussels Regulation).
Legal requirements that are not designed to ensure a certain level of protection within the UK, or at least Northern Ireland as a part of the UK, but to protect from an abstract risk in case the goods end up in the EU, are not a reasonably foreseeable basis to open jurisdiction based on the principle of co-defendants under Art. 8 BR.
UK National part of patent.
The fact, that a party is the Authorized Representative for a non-EU based manufacturer in Northern Ireland, is – as far as the evidence shows – not a sufficient basis for qualifying this party being a joint tortfeasor with the actual importer or an intermediary in the meaning of the English law. (Article 62 , 63 (1) UPCA).
Costs (Article 69(2) UPCA).
Split costs decision - the costs should be split proportionally, not per party.
Pursuant to Art. 1 (2) and (3) of the Guidelines, the ceilings on recoverable costs apply to the costs of representation at each instance of the proceedings, irrespective of the number of parties.
