UPC_CFI_860/2025

Decisions and documents (2)

• 2026-08-19procedural

  Klägerin:

  LS9 GmbH

  Beklagte:

  Bellissa HAAS GmbH

  1. The subject-matter of an action for revocation before the Unified Patent Court is determined not only by the grounds for revocation invoked within the meaning of Article 138(1) EPC, but also by the prior-art documents and arguments relied upon in support of the revocation. 2. The concept of being concerned by a patent, as laid down in Article 47(6) UPCA for revocation actions, is to be interpreted broadly. A distinction must be drawn between private and commercial acts, as Article 27(a) UPCA makes clear. Since legal persons cannot act “privately”, their acts must always be classified as commercial. As a general rule, legal persons are always to be regarded as being “concerned” within the meaning of Article 47(6) UPCA. They have, as a matter of principle, an interest in ensuring that patents which should not have been granted because a ground for revocation exists are not maintained. This applies irrespective of whether they are already active in a relevant industry. Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_860/2025

  Judge: Andrea Postiglione • Panel: Andrea Postiglione🔒 Unlock Official PDF
• 2026-05-27procedural

  Klägerin:

  LS9 GmbH

  Beklagte:

  Bellissa HAAS GmbH

  Revocation Action. Document: 26-05-27 Regel 105 Verfuegung final signiert_GDPR checked.pdf. Case page: https://www.unifiedpatentcourt.org/en/node/183379

  Judge: Andrea Postiglione • Panel: Andrea Postiglione🔒 Unlock Official PDF