Newsletter | Intellectual Property 20/07/2026

On 2 June 2026, the UPC Court of Appeal issued its first comprehensive ruling confirming that Art. 34 UPCA does not confine the UPC’s jurisdiction to its own territory, setting out a structured framework of principles for exercising jurisdiction over national designations outside the UPC. The Court of Appeal confirmed the same principles in a further decision issued on 13 July 2026.

In our previous newsletter of March 2026, we looked at the UPC’s first request for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU, expected to clarify the boundaries of the UPC’s so-called “long-arm jurisdiction”. The ruling at hand does not close that chapter on its own, but takes our analysis further and contributes to completing the picture.

In this context, Chiomenti Professionals analyzed the key elements of the decision in their latest newsletter, highlighting the factual background of the case, the extraterritorial jurisdiction and how Art. 34 UPCA does not confine the UPC to its own territory, the framework governing the exercise of jurisdiction, and the main takeaways and practical implications.