ARTICLE
29 June 2026

CoA, 22 June 2026, Order On A Preliminary Objection (R. 19 RoP), UPC-CoA 50/2026

BP
Bardehle Pagenberg

Contributor

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG combines the expertise of attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. As one of the largest IP firms in Europe, BARDEHLE PAGENBERG advises in all fields of Intellectual Property, including all procedures before the patent and trademark offices as well as litigation before the courts through all instances.
Commercial link (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA) requires relations between defendants regarding commercial activities for the alleged infringing product or range.
Luxembourg Intellectual Property
Max Niklas Weiler’s articles from Bardehle Pagenberg are most popular:
  • in Asia
Bardehle Pagenberg are most popular:
  • within Privacy topic(s)

Key takeaways

Commercial link (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA) requires relations between defendants regarding commercial activities for the alleged infringing product or range.

These activities include research and development, manufacturing, sales, and distribution of the product or product range.

Membership in the same corporate group can establish a commercial link (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA) if each defendant’s activity relates to the infringing products.

This applies provided the activity of each defendant within the group is connected to the product or range of products alleged to infringe.

The action must concern the same alleged infringement (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA).

The “same alleged infringement” condition (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA) requires acts to relate to the same patent and substantially the same product or range.

This assessment is summary, disregarding trade names or whether products are marketed through the same supply and distribution chain.

Jurisdiction at the preliminary objection stage is assessed by summary review, not a full merits assessment (Rule 19 RoP; Rule 333 RoP).

The Court does not conduct an exhaustive examination of evidence but relies on a summary appreciation of facts presented.

Division

Court of Appeal, Chamber 1e, Luxembourg

UPC number

UPC-CoA-50/2026

Type of proceedings

Appeal against an order on a preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) concerning jurisdiction.

Parties

Appellants / Defendants: Robert Bosch DOO Beograd; Robert Bosch France SAS; Robert Bosch GmbH; Robert Bosch S.A. (Belgium); Robert Bosch Produktie S.A.; Bosch Automotive Products (Changsha) Co., Ltd.

Respondent / Claimant: Valeo Systèmes d’Essuyage

Patent(s)

EP 4 144 599

Jurisdictions

Germany, Belgium, France

Body of legislation / Rules

Rule 19, 220.2, 333 RoP, Art. 25, 26, 33(1)(b) UPCA

ORDER_Bosch v Valeo_CoA_50-2026_2026-06-22_FR_Signed

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.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More