- with readers working within the Construction & Engineering industries
- within Transport topic(s)
1. Key takeaways
Representation by attorney at law or patent attorney (Art. 48, 58 UPCA)
A party can choose freely between being represented by an attorney at law, a patent attorney or a team of both. There is no obligation to consider the nature of the case.
This is also reflected in the headnotes:
1) It follows from Art. 48 UPCA that a party has the fundamental right to freely choose whether it wishes to be represented by a lawyer authorised to practise before a court of a Contracting Member State) or a European Patent Attorney according to Art. 48 II UPCA or by a team of both, optionally assisted by patent attorneys.
2) Neither Art. 48 UPCA nor Art. 58 UPCA implies that the right to freely choose a representative in proceedings before the UPC and to be represented by this representative in all relevant matters can be restricted with regard to whether the representative has a more legal or a more technical background. Both types of representatives are to be treated equally. As with technically qualified judges, the competence of a patent attorney to represent is not limited to purely technical matters.
Confidentiality club: no basis for excluding patent attorneys
Defendant argued that there would not be any need to provide access to the confidential information to the patent attorneys participating on behalf of the claimant. The Court did not find any reason or basis in the law to restrict permittance to the confidentiality club for one group of representatives based on the nature of the case. Instead, the Court found that there is a freedom for the party to choose their representative.
2. Division
Local Division Munich
3. UPC number
UPC_CFI_609/2025
4. Type of proceedings
Main infringement action; in particular, interlocutory procedural order (confidentiality club)
5. Parties
Claimant: UERAN Technology LLC
Defendants: Xiaomi Corporation; Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd.; Xiaomi Inc.; Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.; Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH; Xiaomi Technology France S.A.S.; Xiaomi Technology Italy S.R.L.; Xiaomi Technology Sweden AB; Romania Xiaomi Communication Technology S.R.L.
6. Patent(s)
EP 2 661 133
7. Jurisdictions
UPC
8. Body of legislation / Rules
R. 262.2 RoP, R. 262A RoP.
Art. 48 UPCA, Art. 58 UPCA.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]