• BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT partners Christian W. Appelt and Dr. Markus Engelhard stand in front of large windows in an office in Munich; Mr. Appelt looks at a laptop; Mr. Engelhard smiles at the camera.

The European Unitary Patent System

Information & guidance

UPC – what is it all about?

The European Unitary Patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) have formed the new European patent system since 1 June 2023. The system enables patent protection across multiple participating EU Member States through a single unitary right and provides a centralized framework for patent litigation.

As a result, both the protection and enforcement of patents in Europe have changed significantly. Patent proprietors now have additional options when developing and implementing their patent strategies, while the growing body of UPC case law continues to shape the European patent landscape.

The articles and overviews below provide practical guidance on the Unitary Patent system, the UPC and the strategic considerations associated with both. While this information is intended to offer a useful overview, it does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to be exhaustive. If you have any questions regarding the Unitary Patent system, our patent attorneys and attorneys at law will be pleased to assist you.

UPC – who is involved?

The European Union has a total of 27 member states.

Currently, 18 EU member states participate in the Unitary Patent System as well as in the European Patent Court (UPC):

Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Bulgaria (BG), Germany (DE), Denmark (DK), Estonia (EE), Finland (FI), France (FR), Italy (IT), Lithuania (LT), Luxembourg (LU), Latvia (LV), Malta (MT), the Netherlands (NL), Portugal (PT), Romania (RO), Sweden (SE) and Slovenia (SI).

The following EU Member States do not currently participate in the UPC system:

Cyprus (CY), Czech Republic (CZ), Spain (ES), Greece (GR), Croatia (HR), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Poland (PL) and Slovakia (SK).

States in Europe participating in the EPC but not in the UPC:

Albania (AL), Switzerland (CH), United Kingdom (GB), Iceland (IS), Monaco (MC), Macedonia (MK), Norway (NO), Serbia (RS), San Marino (SM) and Turkey (TR).

Non-member states, with which validation agreements or extension agreements are in force:

Morocco (MA), Tunisia (TN), Moldova (MD), Bosnia and Herzegovina (BA), Montenegro (ME) and Cambodia (KH).

Everything you need to know!

The European Unitary Patent

The Unified Patent Court

Structure and functioning, competences, procedure, costs and reimbursement of costs – all details can be found here!

The Unitary Patent

Since the introduction of the unitary patent, what has to be considered when drafting patent-related contracts? Is the German patent still justified? Learn more here!

Opt-out

The “opt-out” mechanism allows proprietors of European patents to exclude their patents from the jurisdiction of the UPC under certain conditions. Learn more about the available options and strategic considerations.

Recommended actions

The Unitary Patent system provides a number of different options when shaping a European patent strategy. Find out what choices are available.

FAQ

The Unitary Patent System in a nutshell

The Unitary Patent system consists of the European Unitary Patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC). The UPC has jurisdiction over unitary patents and, in many cases, also over European patents. Together, they provide a centralized framework for patent protection, enforcement and validity challenges across the participating Member States.

Of the 27 Member States of the European Union, 18 currently participate in the Unified Patent Court (UPC). These are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden. Additional EU Member States may join the system in the future.

The UPC consists of a Court of First Instance, a Court of Appeal and a Registry. The Court of First Instance comprises a central chamber (with its seat in Paris and a division in Munich) and several local and regional chambers in the contracting member states. The Court of Appeal, like the Registry, has its seat in Luxembourg.

With a single request for unitary effect, patent protection can be obtained in all participating Member States of the Unitary Patent system. In addition, disputes can be handled centrally before the UPC, reducing the need for parallel proceedings before national courts. The system therefore offers potential efficiencies in both patent protection and enforcement.

A Unitary Patent can only be obtained on the basis of a European patent granted by the European Patent Office (EPO). After grant, the patent proprietor may request unitary effect within one month of publication of the mention of grant in the European Patent Bulletin. This extends protection to all participating Member States of the Unitary Patent system.

Participation in the Unitary Patent system is not mandatory. Under certain conditions, proprietors of traditional European patents may opt-out of the jurisdiction of the UPC. As a result, disputes concerning these patents remain subject to the jurisdiction of the national courts. No official fee is charged for filing an opt-out declaration.

Detailed information on the opt-out option can be found here.

Court fees before the Unified Patent Court (UPC) consist of fixed fees and, in certain cases, value-based fees. The amount payable depends on the type of action and, where applicable, the value in dispute.

Fixed fees*:
– Infringement actions/ actions for a declaration of non-infringement: €11,000
– Provisional measures/ counterclaims for revocation: €11,000
– Revocation actions: €20,000
– Appeals: €11,000

Value-based fees*:
– Infringement actions/ actions for a declaration of non-infringement: €2,500 (amount in dispute up to €500,000) – €325,000  (amount in dispute from €50,000,000)
– Counterclaims for revocation: max. €20,000

In addition, attorney fees and security deposits may be incurred. Further information can be found in our article Costs and cost reimbursement in UPC proceedings.
*Court fees are subject to amendments of the applicable UPC fee schedule.

No. During the current transitional period, proprietors of European bundle patents may choose whether to enforce their patents before the Unified Patent Court (UPC) or before the respective national courts. The same applies to third parties wishing to challenge European patents through revocation actions. This is commonly referred to as “shared jurisdiction”.

The transitional period is initially set for seven years and may be extended. Once the transitional period ends, the UPC will generally have exclusive jurisdiction over European patents in the participating Member States, unless a valid opt-out has been registered.

Unlike national patents, proprietors of a Unitary Patent pay a single renewal fee in euros to the European Patent Office. Whether a Unitary Patent is more cost-effective than traditional validations depends primarily on the number of countries in which protection is sought and the expected lifetime of the patent.

The Unitary Patent may offer cost advantages where a European patent would otherwise need to be validated in several countries. Costs equivalent to maintaining a European patent in four countries are often used as a benchmark for comparison. The greater the number of countries covered and the longer the patent remains in force, the greater the potential cost savings may be. Read more here.

UPC Update

The latest on the Unitary Patent System

Scales of justice representing the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and current developments in European patent litigation

Court of Appeal extends jurisdiction of the Central Division for infringement actions

UPC-Update
New jurisdiction rules open up additional litigation options. Patent holders now have more flexibility in choosing a court. In public discourse around the UPC, the Local Divisions are associated with infringement actions and the Central Divisions with stand-alone nullity actions. However, the Central…
Scales of justice representing the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and current developments in European patent litigation

Local Division Dusseldorf endorses the Plant-e v. Arkyne test for assessing equivalence

UPC-Update
The validation of the Plant-e-Test by a German Local Division paves the way for the standardization of equivalence rulings at the UPC. In Wonderland v. Cybex, concerning the infringement of patents relating to child seats and strollers (UPC_CFI_807/2024 and UPC_CFI_334/2025, decision of 27 May 2026),…
Richterhammer auf digitalem Hintergrund als Symbol für aktuelle Entwicklungen beim Einheitspatentgericht (UPC) und im europäischen Patentrecht

Fujifilm v Kodak: UPC Court of Appeal Provides Further Guidance on Long-Arm Jurisdiction

UPC-Update
With its decision in Fujifilm v. Kodak (UPC_CoA_312/2025, UPC_CoA_333/2025, UPC_CoA_880/2025, and UPC_CoA_882/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal has established a structured framework for future long-arm disputes. Introduction In its decision of 2 June 2026 in Fujifilm v Kodak (UPC_CoA_312/2025, UPC_CoA_333/2025,…
Aufgeklapptes Buch mit Brille vor hellem Hintergrund mit der Headline UPC Update und dem Logo von BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT

No infringement without fixation – The UPC Court of Appeal on functional claim construction and entering an appearance in electronic proceedings

UPC-Update
HUROM v. NUC/WARMCOOK: UPC_CoA_409/2025, 410/2025, 420/2025 – decision of 27 March 2026 In this decision, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court clarifies that functional claim features must not be construed in isolation from the technical operation disclosed in the patent description –…
Blaues Bild in Puzzleoptik mit der Headline UPC Update und dem Logo von BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT

UPC Court of Appeal on security for costs: Litigation insurance recognised in principle, subject to scrutiny

UPC-Update
The Court of Appeal recognises litigation insurance as a potentially relevant element in the assessment of security for costs under the UPC. In its decision of 21 February 2026 in Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine v Healios K.K. (UPC_CoA_489/2025), the Unified Patent Court Court of Appeal…
Blaues Bild in Puzzleoptik mit der Headline UPC Update und dem Logo von BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT

BSH before the UPC and the German courts – first applications, an emerging tendency and open guiding questions [Update on BSH case law]

IP-Update
Update on the article “BSH as a Gateway to Cross-Border Patent Enforcement: The Regeneron/Bayer vs Formycon and Onesta vs BMW Cases” from December 1, 2025 The CJEU’s decision in BSH v Electrolux (C-339/22) has by now been expressly taken up in several decisions of the UPC, in particular with regard…