In episode 10 of You, me & the UPC, Charlie French and Sam Harvey look at life in the UPC following the CJEU’s decision in BSH v Electrolux (C-339/22), which marked a significant shift in the approach to jurisdiction for patent disputes in Europe.
They discuss the UPC case law since that decision was handed down in February 2025, including IMC Creations v Mul-T-Lock, Dainese v Alpinestars,Genevant and Arbutus v Moderna, Seoul Viosys v Laser Components and Hurom v NUC Electonics, and look ahead to what this might mean for patent litigation in the UPC and national courts in future.
Note: All information was correct at the time of recording.
More detailed commentary is available in our article: The long arm of the law: the UPC’s approach to jurisdiction post-Electrolux
Thanks for listening! Follow us on LinkedIn.

/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/MediaLibrary/Images/2025-09-29-13-48-10-128-68da8e1af6347a2c4b96de4e.png)
/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/MediaLibrary/Images/2025-07-10-13-52-35-189-686fc5a39f23a993118ba1a0.png)
/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/SearchServiceImages/2026-02-20-09-54-03-745-69982f3bff07facd13d88f69.jpg)
/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/SearchServiceImages/2026-02-18-09-25-14-317-6995857a406a38553e720e5d.jpg)