UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases1Decisions4Judges2Parties2Firms
Filing trendsOutcomesPendencyTechnologyForum strategyLeading casesLegal issuesSecurity for costs

Legal issues

Cross-cutting view of legal principles, recurring arguments, and the prior art the court relies on.

Legal principleintervener bears its own costs if the supported party loses (derived from R. 315.4 RoP)Clear all

Filtering to principle: intervener bears its own costs if the supported party loses (derived from R. 315.4 RoP)

Clear principle filter
Most-litigated legal principles
Recurring legal principles across 1 cases with reasoning extracted. Success rate counts patentee-favorable outcomes only.
PrincipleCasesDecidedPatentee success
invalidity may only be raised as a defence through a formal counterclaim for revocation under r. 25 and r. 42 rop; bare invalidity defence without counterclaim is inadmissible11100%
permanent removal from distribution channels is a distinct and independent remedy from recall under art. 63 upca11100%
publication of judgment under art. 80 upca requires specific preventive interest; not granted automatically11100%
intervener bears its own costs if the supported party loses (derived from r. 315.4 rop)11100%
Most-rejected arguments
Arguments that the UPC has not accepted, ranked by repeat occurrences across cases.
ArgumentPartyCases
publication of the judgment in trade press should be orderedClaimant1
patent is invalid due to added matter (überschreitung der ursprungsoffenbarung)Respondent1
Most-cited prior art
References relied on across substantive merits cases, with the role they typically play.

No prior-art data in the current scope.