IP Fridays - your intellectual property podcast about trademarks, patents, designs and much more · Rolf Claessen and Ken Suzan

The Current State of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) – Interview With Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – Comparison With the US and China – Strategies for Plaintiffs and Defendants – Learnings From Key Cases – Cross – Border Litigation With the UPC – Top Mistakes of Plaintiffs and Defendants at the UPC – IP Fridays – Episode 169

·50 min·3 clips

The Zingentegi-Zumiagra case became a landmark because one infringement in one country was enough for an injunction.

1. IP Fridays episode 169 focuses on the Unified Patent Court, or UPC, and how its first years are affecting European patent disputes. 2. The hosts, Rolf Klesen and Ken Suzanne, interview Professor Alois Hüttermann, co-founder of Michalske Hüttermann & Partner and author of several UPC books, because he has worked on UPC cases and co-edits the UPC standard commentary. 3. The interview asks what the UPC is for: how plaintiffs and defendants should use it, and how its first decisions shape strategy. 4. Hüttermann compares the UPC with the U.S. and China and says the UPC is "much cheaper" than the U.S. system. 5. He says China sees around 40,000 infringement cases a year, while the UPC had 164 cases last year and roughly 200 this year. 6. He argues that the UPC can become more important as case numbers rise and as more European sales are brought into its territory. 7. He says the UPC can be used as a negotiation tool because it is quick and can reach many markets once a patent is validated widely enough. 8. He highlights the Zingentegi-Zumiagra case as the most important UPC matter he has worked on. 9. He says the Court of Appeal treated infringement in one country as usually enough for an injunction. 10. He also says the case involved a sample taken in the Czech Republic and a later sale of the same product in Bulgaria under the same name. 11. Hüttermann says the case taught him to go into oral hearings with a small team because a judge can ask an unexpected question and leave only about 20 minutes for an answer. 12. He names Klaus Kavinsky and Jan Karten as judges who asked questions the team had not expected at appeal hearing. 13. He says the European Court of Justice decision in Bosch-Siemens-Hausarz-Geräte v Electrolux is a "real game changer" for European IP. 14. He explains that the old Gatluf regime limited cross-border injunctions, while the new approach can allow courts to issue cross-border relief when the defendant is domiciled in the relevant country. 15. He says an anchor defendant can matter in group cases and mentions a Hong Kong defendant in a case where cross-border relief was discussed. 16. He says UPC validity law is mostly aligned with the European Patent Office, and he sums it up as "nothing new under the sun." 17. He says the UPC follows the EPO closely on novelty, inventive step, and added matter, including strict treatment of intermediate generalisation. 18. The conversation is interview-style, practical, and detailed, with many case references, procedural examples, and strategy points for litigants. 19. Patent litigators, in-house counsel, and European IP strategists would likely benefit most from this episode. 20. Listeners looking for a light overview rather than specific UPC litigation detail may skip it.

As heard by us

A procedural look at the UPC's early shape, with strategy tied to first decisions.

Episode 169 examines the Unified Patent Court through early rulings and the way litigants are already adjusting. Professor Alois Huttermann, a co-founder of Michalske Huttermann & Partner and an expert on the UPC, talks through what plaintiffs and defendants can take from the…

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

When you want the UPC decoded through real strategy, not slogans.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from IP Fridays - your intellectual property podcast about trademarks, patents, designs and much more