UPC Confirms Admissibility Of Request To Increase Security For Costs

In a procedural order issued on July 20, 2026, by the Paris Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in the infringement action KEEEX v. Adobe et al., the court granted an additional top-up to the security for legal costs previously ordered under Rule 158 of the Rules of Procedure. The initial security, set in December 2025 at €200,000, was increased by €100,000 (a 50% top-up). While the defendant, Adobe, had sought a vastly higher additional security of up to €1.8 million, the judge found a moderate top-up to be the most appropriate remedy. 

The top-up was permitted primarily because of new procedural developments that directly increased the legal expenses borne by the defendants. Specifically, KEEEX introduced a claim for provisional damages amounting to €120 million in its reply on the merits. The court recognized that forcing Adobe to formulate a defence against a claim of this magnitude inevitably drove up its legal costs in a way directly attributable to KEEEX. While Adobe tried to argue that other factors—such as counterclaims for patent invalidity or the general complexity of multi-defendant proceedings—justified a much larger sum, the court noted that those were standard developments or exacerbated by Adobe's own procedural choices.

Crucially, the court carefully balanced this cost adjustment against the core principles of proportionality and access to justice. Because KEEEX is a small micro-enterprise founded by an individual inventor, imposing an excessive security burden would have infringed upon its fundamental right to an effective remedy under EU law (Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights). Consequently, the judge refused to apply standard statutory cost-cap percentages mechanically, ruling that a measured €100,000 top-up struck the right balance between covering Adobe's genuinely increased defence costs and ensuring the claimant was not priced out of court.