HAMBURG LOCAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Lukas Wosnitza, Michael Schneider, Sönke Scheltz and Désirée Heintz, Eisenführ Speiser
6.4 Improvements to the UPC Implementation of the new CMS as quickly as possible (which is thankfully already underway) could improve the functioning of the UPC. Other than that, there is not much to do – the staff and judges have shown an incredible degree of com - mitment and dedication in the first two years, which has been the foundation of the success of the new system. Together, it is hoped that they can keep it up.
agement system (CMS) of the UPC can only help to further focus both parties’ and judges’ work on the material issues of the case. The emerging case law regarding the long-arm jurisdiction of the UPC, and in the area of standard-essential patent/fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (SEP/FRAND), is likely to gain further traction and establish the UPC as an international forum. Further diversification of litigation strategies, combining UPC and national cases – includ - ing German utility model claims, for example – should also be seen. 6.3 The Future of National Patent Litigation National patent litigation will most likely continue playing a substantial role as Germany is one of the biggest markets, and the infringement pro - ceedings at the German courts are cheaper and bear a smaller cost risk. In particular, this might prompt smaller and medium-sized companies to opt for the national courts – and the now-avail - able parallel national German patents – instead of the UPC.
41
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook