- within Wealth Management, Employment and HR and Transport topic(s)
- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Finance and Tax Executives
The PMAC's Arbitration, Mediation and Expert Determination Rules have been formally adopted and its inauguration is set for 2 June 2026 in Ljubljana. This post contains a practical overview of the Centre's offerings, from mediation and arbitration to expert determination and FRAND dispute resolution.
Established under Article 35 of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA), which is currently in force across 18 EU Member States, the Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC) of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is an independent, specialised alternative dispute resolution institution, which will offer mediation, arbitration and expert determination services for resolving patent disputes, collectively referred to as “ADR”. PMAC will handle disputes concerning classical European patents (EPs) and EPs with unitary effect (known as unitary patents (UPs)) as well as other related disputes, including complex cross-border disputes and Standard Essential Patent (SEP) and Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) cases.
Following a lengthy public consultation process, PMAC’s Arbitration, Mediation and Expert Determination Rules, in this post collectively referred to as the “PMAC Rules", have been approved and adopted by the UPC Administrative Committee and are now available on the UPC website and the PMAC website. PMAC has commenced offering mediation services as of 12 May 2026, with arbitration and expert determination services following later in 2026.
In this post we look at what the PMAC is and what it will offer following the adoption of the PMAC Rules. For more on the UPC, including the participating states, see our UPC blog post series and our UPC Hub page.
Comment
The formal adoption of the PMAC Rules and the imminent inauguration of PMAC mark a significant turning point for patent dispute resolution in Europe and beyond. For the first time, parties to patent disputes arising from EPs, UPs or related rights will have access to a dedicated, specialised ADR institution purpose-built for the patent ecosystem.
PMAC's offering is notably broad. Mediation, arbitration, expert determination, hybrid Med-Arb proceedings and a bespoke framework for FRAND disputes are all available under a single, coherent set of procedural rules. This breadth of options, combined with the ability to pursue ADR both independently and in parallel with UPC litigation, gives parties considerable flexibility in tailoring their dispute resolution strategy to the nature and complexity of the issues at hand.
This integrated approach has the potential to reduce fragmentation, lower costs and encourage earlier resolution of disputes that might otherwise proceed through lengthy court proceedings across multiple jurisdictions.
PMAC is well positioned to become a leading ADR hub for patent disputes and we will continue to monitor developments as it commences its services and its caseload begins to take shape.
For more detail on PMAC and how the arbitration and mediation process will work and integrate with UPC proceedings, see below.
What is PMAC?
PMAC is an ADR institution offering both independent global ADR services for intellectual property disputes and a model multi-door courthouse policy approach to dispute resolution through parallel ADR and UPC litigation. This means that parties can come to PMAC for arbitration, mediation or expert determination independently of UPC proceedings, or alongside them.
PMAC has competence over EPs within the UPC's jurisdiction, UPs and supplementary protection certificates related to those patents (SPCs). as well as "related disputes" (see Article 2.1 PMAC Rules). "Related disputes" are defined as those including other patents (not within the UPC's jurisdiction), patent applications or portfolios regardless of their territorial scope, or "any other intellectual property or commercial disputes" provided they are connected factually, legally or commercially with an "actual or contemplated" dispute regarding an EP, UP or SPC within the UPC's jurisdiction (Article 1 PMAC Rules).
Litigation and ADR in parallel
The UPC can invite parties to consider ADR as an alternative method to settle their dispute (Article 5 PMAC Rules). Parties can request further information about the ADR offerings available from PMAC under Article 4 of the PMAC Rules. The UPC can only refer parties to ADR proceedings if both agree and consent to it.
There is no automatic stay of UPC proceedings if the parties to a dispute commence ADR proceedings at PMAC. Nonetheless, if a stay is granted on joint request by the parties, PMAC will inform the UPC once its proceedings have been completed or have terminated.
ADR proceedings
Appointment of the panel: Once a dispute has been referred to PMAC, an arbitrator, mediator or expert will be appointed either by nomination by the parties confirmed by PMAC or appointed by PMAC. This can be from the publicly available list of PMAC arbitrators, mediators and experts or any other arbitrator, mediator or expert who complies with the requirements in the PMAC Criteria for Selection.
Location: PMAC itself has two official locations, in Ljubljana, Slovenia and Lisbon, Portugal, although arbitral tribunals and experts have a wide discretion to determine the venue of arbitration proceedings and expert determinations respectively.
Languages: The official languages of PMAC include English, French and German. PMAC ADR is not limited to these languages – it can be conducted in either a language agreed by the parties or determined by the arbitrator/PMAC/expert if the parties cannot agree (Article 16 Arbitration Rules; Article 15 Mediation Rules; and Article 13 Expert Determination Rules).
Confidentiality: The PMAC Rules impose broad confidentiality obligations over the existence and content of the proceedings and any information disclosed during the proceedings on all participants to ADR, including the PMAC, the arbitrator/mediator/expert, the parties and the parties’ counsel. Interestingly, however, under the Arbitration and Expert Determination Rules, PMAC may publish the award, orders or determination in an anonymised form unless a party objects to this in writing through the PMAC case management system within 60 days of notification of an award/order/determination.
Arbitration
The Arbitration Rules are modern and comprehensive, containing all the provisions one would expect from a global arbitration institution, while being tailored to the UPC framework. In addition to the express confidentiality provision, the Arbitration Rules offer emergency arbitration, an expedited procedure, detailed provisions on interim relief (including the possibility of obtaining ex-parte relief) and a detailed document production process.
Mediation
As with the Arbitration Rules above, the Mediation Rules incorporate all the procedural elements of modern mediation proceedings, as well as a structured framework governing the interaction between mediation proceedings and pending UPC litigation. In addition to robust procedural provisions, the Mediation Rules include stipulations for expedited procedures (Article 17 Mediation Rules) and hybrid Mediation-Arbitration or 'Med-Arb' proceedings.Med-Arb proceedings containing elements of both mediation and arbitration, engaging both Mediation and Arbitration Rules and requiring the joint agreement of the parties (Article 19 Mediation Rules).
Expert Determination
The Expert Determination Rules provide a flexible and specialised mechanism for the resolution of discrete legal, factual or technical issues, whether as a standalone procedure or in conjunction with Arbitration or Mediation proceedings before PMAC. These Rules include all the procedural elements of expert determination, as well as dedicated provisions for FRAND and SEP disputes, including essentiality assessments and royalty rate determinations.
FRAND disputes
PMAC will also establish "non-binding Guidelines for dealing with FRAND Disputes" which will set out best practice recommendations (Article 49 Arbitration Rules; Article 27 Mediation Rules; Article 21 Expert Determination Rules). It will be interesting to see whether these guidelines have broader application to FRAND litigation before the UPC courts, and whether the UPC divisions will take account of them in their future practice.
Under the Arbitration and Mediation Rules, parties are directed to define the scope of any FRAND dispute as precisely as possible and raise the relevant matter(s) with the arbitrator or mediator, preferably before the first case management conference (Article 48 Arbitration Rules; Article 28 Mediation Rules).
The Expert Determination Rules set out a procedural framework for FRAND disputes. Parties may request a determination in relation to SEPs or portfolios and/or an assessment of FRAND terms. Requests for determinations can be following recommendation by the UPC and can be filed in relation to pending proceedings before the UPC or other PMAC proceedings.
A number of commentators have suggested arbitration as a means to resolve multi-jurisdictional FRAND disputes for some time now. Parties have often been reluctant to pursue this but with encouragement from the UPC it could become a more popular option in future. The difficulty remains that it requires both parties to engage in the process and there is often a perception that a particular forum for resolving the dispute will favour one party over the other.
Enforcement of the Award/Settlement
When a settlement or arbitral award has been reached, the parties can jointly request that this be confirmed by the UPC.
Under Article 35(2) UPCA, the PMAC cannot directly limit or revoke a patent. However, if the parties request that a settlement or arbitral award reached through PMAC which includes a term which "obliges the patent owner to limit, surrender or agree to the revocation of a patent or not to assert it against the other party" be confirmed by the UPC, it will do so (Article 21 Mediation Rules and Article 36 Arbitration Rules).
Model clauses and model submission agreements
PMAC has published model dispute resolution clauses and model submission agreements with the aim to further streamline ADR within the UPC framework. The model clauses may be used in a range of commercial contracts drafted by the parties and the model submission agreements can be drafted as separate, stand‑alone documents.
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]
