GERMANY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Bernhard Thum, Andreas Mötsch, Jonas Weickert and Frank Eichelhardt, Thum & Partner | Thum, Mötsch, Weickert Patentanw
them. It offers the possibility of multi-country relief through a single proceeding in participating states, and it continues to attract a significant share of Euro- pean patent disputes. Germany plays a central role within the UPC architec- ture. German divisions are among the most frequently chosen venues, and early procedural culture and case law have been shaped to a meaningful extent by dis- putes heard there. For parties, Germany remains an anchor point in European patent disputes even when • The UPC offers attractive multi-country enforce- ment but must be assessed against central validity and business continuity risks. • German local divisions remain key in UPC practice; plan for procedural expectations that reflect both German and multinational judicial input. Procedural framework : front - loading , deadlines and evidence discipline An attractive feature of the UPC is procedural effi- ciency. Proceedings are front-loaded and run on strict timetables. Parties are expected to present their case early and in full, including technical arguments and key evidence. Late-filed material can be excluded, which increases the importance of early preparation. Claimants benefit from having a well-developed infringement read and a credible validity position before filing, particularly where interim relief is con- sidered. Defendants must be prepared to respond quickly and comprehensively, often with parallel non- infringement and invalidity lines of defence. the UPC is in play. Practical takeaways This has increased the importance of evidence dis- cipline. Technical mapping, prior art triage and the assembly of documentary evidence now happen ear- lier in the life cycle of a dispute. Cross-functional co- ordination is therefore a driver of success, particularly where product information sits across multiple teams or jurisdictions. Practical takeaways • Invest in early technical mapping and prior art tri- age; do not assume you can add it later.
• Implement document retention and retrieval processes that work at UPC speed, including for overseas subsidiaries. Operational and market indicators : resourcing , language and digital infrastructure As case volumes increased, the UPC expanded judi- cial resources, including additional panels in some of the busier local divisions. For parties, this supports throughput and predictability, and reduces the risk of high demand leading to congestion. A practical trend is the increasing use of English, including in proceedings in front of German divisions. For international companies, this reduces translation friction and facilitates centralised management of dis- putes. Another practical development has been the improve- ment of electronic filing and case management infra- structure. From a client perspective, this is not merely administrative: usability and stability affect litigation execution when time limits are tight. Practical takeaways • Build internal response capability for tight UPC timetables, including access to engineers, product data and documents. • Decide early whether English-language proceed- ings are commercially and operationally advanta- Early appellate guidance indicates that the wording of the claim is the decisive starting point for defining scope, but that the description and drawings must be used as explanatory aids. This affects both infringe- ment and validity assessments, and increases the value of coherent claim construction across the case. In practice, inconsistent interpretations across differ- ent procedural stages are becoming increasingly dif- ficult to sustain. Preliminary injunctions The UPC has shown a willingness to address com- plex questions in preliminary injunction proceedings, including validity. In practice, this shifts a significant geous for your business. Key UPC case law trends Claim construction
106 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook