On 25 February the Preparatory Committee of the Unified Patent
Court (UPC) published the agreed Rules on Court fees and
recoverable costs for the new court.
According to the current proposal there will be two kinds of
fees in the UPC:
fixed fees, which are payable for initiating an action
(infringement, declaration of non-infringement, revocation),
applications for search and seizure of evidence, leave to appeal
and other procedural steps;
and, additionally, for infringement actions and declarations of
a value based fee.
It is currently proposed that the additional value-based fee
will be scaled according to the value of the action, for actions
valued between more than €500,000 and a maximum of more than
€50 million – the fee ranging from a minimum of
€2,500 to a maximum of €325,000. For actions valued up to
and including €500,000, only the fixed fee of €11,000
will be payable for an infringement or non-infringement action.
Only a fixed fee of €20,000 is payable for a stand-alone
revocation action. If the revocation action, however, is lodged by
counterclaim, the fee will be calculated on the same basis as the
infringement action, up to a cap of €20,000. For preliminary
injunction proceedings, only the fixed fee of €11,000 accrues,
irrespective of the value of the action.
Fees may be reduced in certain circumstances, in particular:
partial reimbursement when the action is withdrawn or settled
(from 20% to 60% depending on the stage at which this
Subject to certain requirements, small enterprises and
micro-enterprises are entitled to pay only 60% of fees;
If the action is heard by a single judge the party liable for
the fees will be reimbursed by 25%.
If, on the basis of reasonably plausible and available evidence,
the amount of payable fees threatens the economic existence of a
party who is not a natural person the court may, upon request by
that party, wholly or partially reimburse the fixed and value-based
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The focus on the product being obvious or anticipated as at a certain date provides powerful protection and commercial certainty without conflicting with a patentee's ability to obtain patent protection.
The High Court considered a claim by Azumi, the owner of high-end Japanese restaurant Zuma against Zuma's Choice Pet Products Limited (ZCPP) and its director Zoe Vanderbilt for trade mark infringement.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).