The Unified Patent Court (UPC) was established to, among other objectives, reduce divergences in the interpretation of European substantive patent law by national courts, other competent national authorities, the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Boards of Appeal of the EPO (EPO BoA) and, as a consequence, to increase legal certainty. This article analyses the first three years of UPC case law concerning the interpretation of patentability requirements and other substantive provisions of the European Patent Convention (EPC) and compares it with the established jurisprudence of the EPO BoA. It further examines UPC case law relating to actions brought against EPO decisions concerning the Unitary Patent. Finally, this article considers the institutional preconditions necessary for harmonisation and explores the potential impact of the exclusion of major European patent litigation states from the UPC system, as well as recent discussions on a more balanced distribution of cases within the UPC Court of First Instance and a possible extension of the transitional period during which the UPC and the national authorities of participating states exercise parallel jurisdiction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luginbuehl et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: