3 July 2023
Authored and Edited by Dr. Antje Brambrink; Dr. Dr. Jochen Herr, LL.M.
As reported earlier this year (see our blog post), it had long remained unclear where the third seat of the Central Division will be established after the United Kingdom decided to leave the European Union and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) system. Milan was long discussed as potential successor of the Central Division’s London seat.
After the UPC having provided an interim solution by splitting the cases of the former London section between the Paris and Munich seats of the Central Division, the UPC’s Administrative Committee has now decided that the third seat of the Central Division shall be established in Milan.
Originally the London section of the Central Division was supposed to hear cases on human necessities, chemistry and metallurgy. However, a reallocation of cases pending at the Central Division was also decided:
These changes require an amendment of Art. 7(2) and Annex II of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), meaning that the decision of the Administrative Committee shall not take effect if a Contracting Member State declares within twelve months of the date of the decision, that it does not wish to be bound by the decision (Art. 87(3) UPCA). In view of this the Administrative Committee noted: “In bona fide and without prejudice to Article 87(3) UPCA, preparatory work will start upon the adoption of this decision to ensure that the amendments that are the subject matter of the decision are fully and immediately operational at the moment of its entry into effect.” And the Italian Government announced that it is already “working to make the Milan Section fully operational within the timeframe envisaged by the Agreement (12 months under Art. 87.3)”.
Copyright © 2023 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026
May 26, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.