The relationship between the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) have been in the spotlight ever since the UPC opened its doors. With parallel jurisdictions, overlapping procedures, and strategic considerations for litigants, understanding the interaction between the two has become not just important, but essential for practitioners and rights holders.
In this panel, the interplay between EPO oppositions and UPC revocation actions will be explored in depth. These mechanisms provide routes to challenge the validity of an European patent and yet they operate independently and under different procedural frameworks. This raises questions about timing, strategy and possible outcomes. For example, should a party initiate an opposition at the EPO, a revocation action before the UPC, or pursue both simultaneously? And how should situations where proceedings before the UPC and the EPO run in parallel be handled? Panelists will explore these dual tracks and their possibility to create opportunities for efficiency or risks of inconsistent decisions.
Closely linked to this discussion is the question regarding the harmonization of legal standards between the EPO and the UPC. While both institutions ultimately assess patent validity, distinct legal traditions and interpretative approaches are taken by them. The EPO benefits from decades of established case law and technical expertise, whereas the UPC is still developing its own jurisprudence. This divergence could lead to uncertainty, especially when issues such as inventive step is assessed differently. In this sense, the panel will examine whether greater alignment is emerging over time, or whether differences will continue to define the relationship between the two institutions.
Stays, procedural coordination and risk mitigation will also be a central focus of the discussion. In parallel proceedings, should one forum pause its case pending the outcome of the other? The UPC has discretion to stay revocation actions in light of ongoing EPO oppositions, but such decisions require a careful balancing of factors, including procedural efficiency, fairness to the parties, and the likelihood of timely resolution. The panel will explore evolving UPC practices, as well as practical strategies for litigants seeking to minimize risk and avoid procedural pitfalls.
The coexistence of the EPO and the UPC offers at the same time opportunities and challenges. For this reason, the panelists will offer broader insights by reflecting on experiences and emerging case-law, identifying trends and considering how greater coherence might be achieved, this session will guide us through the beat of this delicate dance.
By Paula Terzini Leite
