ARTICLE
18 August 2025

Injunction Covering The UK Highlights The Reach Of UPC's Long Arm

JA
J A Kemp LLP

Contributor

J A Kemp is a leading firm of European Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. We combine independent thinking with collective excellence in all that we do. The technical and legal knowledge that we apply to the protection of our clients’ patents is outstanding in its breadth and depth. With around 100 science and technology graduates in the firm, including 50 PhDs, no area of science or technology is outside our scope. Our Patent Attorneys have collective in-depth expertise in patent law and procedure in every country of the world. The team of professionals who advise our clients on trade mark and design matters have backgrounds in major international law firms and hold qualifications as Chartered UK Trade Mark Attorneys, Solicitors and European Trade Mark Professional Representatives. Dedicated to this specialist area of intellectual property protection, the team has the expertise and resources to protect trade marks and designs in any market worldwide.
On 18 July, in what was a landmark ruling in European patent litigation, the Mannheim Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) granted a permanent injunction covering the UK...
United States Intellectual Property

On 18 July, in what was a landmark ruling in European patent litigation, the Mannheim Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) granted a permanent injunction covering the UK, after first finding that the UK part of a European patent was valid and infringed (Kodak v Fujifilm, UPC_CFI_365/2023, 18 July 2025).

What makes this decision notable is that it is the first time that the UPC has applied the decision of the CJEU in BSH Hausgeräte vs Electrolux to its ultimate conclusion, i.e. to the issuance of the injunction in a country where the UPCA is not in-force.

In BSH Hausgeräte vs Electrolux, the CJEU held that a court of an EU Member State can consider the validity of patents granted for "third states" (i.e. states that are not party to the Brussels I bis Regulation or the Lugano Convention, such as the UK) during infringement proceedings brought against defendants domiciled in the EU Member State, but that the validity finding has only inter partes effect.

In the present case, all three of the defendants were domiciled in Germany. So, applying BSH Hausgeräte vs Electrolux, the Mannheim LD concluded that the UPC has jurisdiction to consider the validity of the UK part of the European patent as a prerequisite for infringement.

The UK injunction issued by the Mannheim LD will be enforced by the imposition of a penalty payment to be paid by the German defendants. Thus, it seems that the UK courts will not need to be involved for the injunction to be enforced.

For our full analysis of the decision, please refer to our briefing.

J A Kemp LLP acts for clients in the USA, Europe and globally, advising on UK and European patent practice and representing them before the European Patent Office, UKIPO and Unified Patent Court. We have in-depth expertise in a wide range of technologies, including Biotech and Life Sciences, Pharmaceuticals, Software and IT, Chemistry, Electronics and Engineering and many others. See our website

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More