The fourth panel of the Lisbon Patents and Standards Conference will focus on how companies can develop an effective defensive playbook for patent litigation before the UPC. With decisions that take effect across multiple participating member states, enforcement risks have increased significantly for companies operating in innovation sectors. As a result, anticipating disputes and preparing defensive strategies early has become a critical part of risk management.
This panel will explore how companies can defend themselves in UPC proceedings, with particular attention to litigation strategies that can be deployed even before an infringement action is filed. Speakers will discuss clearing the way strategies that allow companies to address potential patent barriers proactively. These may include tools such as Arrow declarations, revocation actions, sometimes brought by the so called “straw men”, declarations of non-infringement, etc.
A central theme of the panel will be the life sciences sector, where regulatory timelines and product launches are highly sensitive and can touch upon complex patent landscapes. The strategies mentioned above can play a decisive role in managing litigation risks by allowing companies to challenge patents proactively and even create legal certainty in advance of potential infringing proceedings.
The use of cross-border procedural tools is also expected to feature the conversation. In the global SEP disputes, parties may seek anti-suit injunctions (ASIs) in one jurisdiction to prevent litigation from proceeding elsewhere. These measures can significantly influence the dynamics of licensing negotiations and litigation strategy, particularly with the possibility of multiple courts around the world being involved. Panelists will explore how such tactics may interact with proceedings before the UPC and how parties can navigate the strategic challenges that arise from parallel disputes.
Beyond licensing issues, the panel will also examine procedural defensive strategies within the UPC. If successful a revocation can eliminate the patent across all participating member states, making it one of the interesting defensive tools available to companies facing infringement claims. Understanding when and how to make use of these actions can be key in UPC litigation.
Finally, the panel will explore the role of lis pendens and the broader principle of judicial comity in managing parallel litigation. As disputes may unfold simultaneously before the UPC and other national or international courts, questions about which court should proceed first, and how courts should respect each other’s proceedings, may have significant implications. By examining these issues together, the panel aims to provide insight into how companies can anticipate the next move in increasingly complex patent disputes and develop a defensive playbook for the UPC era.
By Paula Terzini Leite
