GERMANY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Bernhard Thum, Andreas Mötsch, Jonas Weickert and Frank Eichelhardt, Thum & Partner | Thum, Mötsch, Weickert Patentanw
Introduction Germany remains a central jurisdiction for intellec- tual property in Europe, both for obtaining rights and for enforcing them. The direction of travel is towards integrated IP management: businesses combine pat- ents, designs, trade marks, trade secrets and unfair competition tools, and they align legal strategy with commercial objectives. Two developments particularly influence the 2026 landscape. First, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has matured into a fast-moving forum that is reshap- ing enforcement strategies in Germany and across Europe. Second, EU design law is undergoing the most significant modernisation in two decades, with important consequences for digital designs and spare parts. This chapter focuses on trends and developments that matter to clients: how disputes are being run in practice, what is changing in enforcement leverage, and where companies should adjust governance, evidence readiness and contractual frameworks. The emphasis is on procedural realities and leverage points rather than black-letter law. Practical takeaways • Treat IP as an integrated portfolio: combine rights and align enforcement with business objectives. • Plan for a dual patent enforcement environment: German national courts and the UPC increasingly interact. Patent Law and Patent Litigation Germany continues to be a preferred venue for patent disputes in Europe, supported by specialised courts and relatively predictable litigation routines. National proceedings remain particularly relevant where par- ties seek market-specific relief, where familiarity with local practice matters, or where the dispute is best managed within a national procedural environment. A defining procedural feature is the separation (“bifur- cation”) of infringement and validity proceedings across different proceedings. This shapes timing and leverage, and remains a defining feature of litigation National patent litigation in Germany Continued relevance of German courts
strategy in Germany. In practice, parties often pursue infringement relief while validity is attacked in parallel in separate proceedings, and strategic decisions are influenced by the expected pace and sequencing of those tracks, including a speed asymmetry between infringement and validity proceedings, and rapid tim- ing for preliminary injunctions. Practical takeaways • National litigation remains strategically impor- tant even if UPC proceedings are contemplated; enforcement at the UPC should not be considered as a complete substitute. • Infringement and validity strategy should be planned together early, as the German procedural structure influences both timing and settlement dynamics. Remedies and commercial leverage in Germany Remedies often drive litigation behaviour as much as legal merits. In Germany, injunctive relief has tradition- ally been a powerful enforcement tool in patent dis- putes, and it continues to shape settlement leverage and risk assessment. While proportionality arguments are increasingly raised by defendants, injunction risk remains a central planning factor. In practice, the business impact of an injunction can be immediate, particularly where products are inte- grated into supply chains or where key customers require continuity. As a result, companies increasingly model remedy exposure early and align legal steps with business continuity planning from the outset of a dispute. Practical takeaways • The commercial impact of an injunction should be considered early, because remedy leverage often determines settlement dynamics. • Internal contingency planning for supply and cus- tomer communication should be prepared where injunction risk is material. UPC patent litigation The UPC as a European forum and Germany ’ s role within it The UPC has introduced a European forum that sits alongside national systems rather than replacing
105 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook