As the UPC continues to take shape through early rulings, procedural clarifications, and appeals, legal teams across Europe are watching closely to understand how this new venue is redefining enforcement strategy. This session offers a practical review of the key decisions to date, considers procedural and jurisdictional trends, and examines the strategic calculus of litigating in the UPC versus national courts.

• Review recent UPC case law and appeals to understand emerging judicial approaches and procedural norms:
- Edwards Lifesciences v Meril (2025)
- Mul-T-Lock v IMC Créations (2025)
- Abbott Diabetes Care v Sibio Technology (2025)
• Examine strategic decision-making: when and why companies are choosing the UPC over national courts. Compare early UPC developments to UK patent litigation to identify points of convergence and divergence.

As the UPC continues to take shape through early rulings, procedural clarifications, and appeals, legal teams across Europe are watching closely to understand how this new venue is redefining enforcement strategy. This session offers a practical review of the key decisions to date, considers procedural and jurisdictional trends, and examines the strategic calculus of litigating in the UPC versus national courts.

• Review recent UPC case law and appeals to understand emerging judicial approaches and procedural norms:
- Edwards Lifesciences v Meril (2025)
- Mul-T-Lock v IMC Créations (2025)
- Abbott Diabetes Care v Sibio Technology (2025)
• Examine strategic decision-making: when and why companies are choosing the UPC over national courts. Compare early UPC developments to UK patent litigation to identify points of convergence and divergence.

With the UPC issuing an increasing number of rulings, its developing case law on injunctions is critical for shaping enforcement strategies. For IP counsel and litigators, understanding how and when the UPC is willing to grant or deny injunctions - whether preliminary or permanent - is essential for advising clients, managing litigation risk, and crafting effective pan-European strategies.

• Review Grundfos v. Canned Motor Pump (Düsseldorf LD), where the court issued a permanent injunction despite ongoing licensing talks and clarified that lack of inventive step must be explicitly argued - not merely referenced via prior art.
• Analyse Boehringer v. Zentiva (Lisbon LD), in which the court denied provisional measures due to lack of proof of imminent infringement, offering key insights into evidentiary thresholds at the UPC.
• Understand the Milan LD’s approach to litigation costs in Ericsson v. Digital River and Oerlikon v. Bhagat, highlighting how procedural context and case complexity affect fee shifting.
• Discuss how this growing body of UPC injunction case law is influencing strategic decision-making across industries and jurisdictions.

Join an exclusive panel featuring esteemed judges from the UPC, whose decisions are shaping the future of patent litigation across Europe. This prestigious session offers a rar opportunity to gain invaluable insights into the judicial mindset and decision-making processes at one of the most important new patent courts globally. Don’t miss this chance to engage with the very authorities defining the UPC’s jurisprudence and influencing litigation strategies across industries.

This session examines how the UPC’s evolving case law on equivalence compares with national practices in jurisdictions such as the UK, Germany, and Brazil. With recent UPC decisions applying the four-prong test to life sciences disputes, panellists will assess whether the doctrine is delivering legal certainty while ensuring fair protection for patentees.

• Analyse how recent UPC rulings apply the doctrine of equivalents and compare with approaches in the UK, Germany, and Brazil.
• Are the four key UPC questions workable in practice, especially in the life sciences context?
• Evaluate the balance between legal certainty for third parties and fair protection for patent holders under the UPC system.