Last June 1st, the Unified Patent Court (‘UPC’) celebrated its third anniversary, coinciding with the opening of the Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC), and the results have been very positive.
By the end of August 2026, more than 800 proceedings on the merits have been initiated: 605 infringement actions, 97 revocation actions and 107 applications for interim measures. 408 decisions were appealed (few on the merits, more on procedural issues)[1] .
An analysis of the statistics published by the UPC shows that:
- At first instance, 45% of infringement actions are decided in favour of the patent holder (the patent is recognised as valid and infringed); amongst revocation actions, 62% result in the patent being upheld (either as granted or in an amended form); and 64 % of applications for interim measures are granted;
- On appeal, 64% of decisions on the merits are upheld (but only 38% of decisions on interim measures).
Stakeholders across all sectors have therefore embraced this new court, which currently appears to strike a fairly balanced approach between the interests of the patent holder and those of third parties.
There are many reasons for this success:
- Decisions on the merits are robust;
- The divisions comprise national judges with a solid background in patent law, and technical judges;
- Decisions are handed down swiftly, between 12 and 14 months after proceedings are initiated. The rules stipulate that the hearing for oral submissions must ‘normally’ take place within one year, although this timeframe may vary depending on the complexity of the case. In revocation proceedings, timeframes of ten months have already been observed.
The UPC is therefore delivering on its promise to provide a uniform, specialised and efficient framework for hearing disputes concerning both classic European patents and those with unitary effect, for the 18 Member States of the UPC Agreement[2] (‘UPCA’).
The UPC’s jurisdiction even extends beyond the borders of its 18 Member States, as it regularly exercises its ‘long arm’ to hear cases – provided the conditions are met – involving acts of infringement of parts of European patents falling within the jurisdiction of non-UPCA member states (or even non-European Union Member States). The current question is how far the UPC’s ‘long arm’ will extend.
As for the PMAC, whilst it forms an integral part of the UPC system, it also positions itself as an independent international dispute resolution centre, alongside other international centres. The PMAC is capable of handling all disputes, including those relating to standard-essential patents, and aims to help the parties find value-creating solutions.
[1] https://www.unifiedpatentcourt.org/en/registry/cases
[2] https://www.unifiedpatentcourt.org/en/organisation/upc-member-states
During a seven-year transitional period, renewable once, proceedings relating to classic European patents may still be brought before national courts. It is also possible to opt out of the UPC’s jurisdiction for these patents (so-called ‘opt-out’ patents).