In Episode 22, our AI hosts unpack Prof. Willem Hoyng’s expert commentary on the UPC decisions from Week 33, 2025.Highlights include:Imminent Infringement – CoA (Boehringer v Zentiva)Pre-launch steps such as pricing and reimbursement may already justify a preliminary injunction before market entry.Patent Invalidity – LD The Hague (Winnow v Orbisk)A broad claim interpretation used for infringement also led to invalidity. The Court applied the PSA but left open whether it is mandatory.Suspensive Effect – CoA (Sun v Vivo)The Court of Appeal rejected a suspension request in an urgent case for lack of a filed appeal. Prof. Hoyng strongly questions that reading of R. 223.4 RoP.Costs & Security – LD Munich & LD Hamburg (Syntorr v Arthrex; Ballinno v UEFA)Examples of pragmatic case management: encouraging early cost settlements and efficient release of security.🎧 Stay ahead of the UPC’s fast-evolving case law with clear insights on both substance and procedure.AI-generated voices; some details or pronunciations may be slightly inaccurate.#UPC #UPCUnfiltered #PatentLitigation #PatentLaw #UnifiedPatentCourt #CaseLaw

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related