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/2024-08-01-13-10-42-472-66ab8952cb2110fd5cb6e568.png)
/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/SearchServiceImages/2026-06-02-23-10-48-401-6a1f62f83507d41e7a0eb7cd.jpg)
/Passle/5f3d6e345354880e28b1fb63/SearchServiceImages/2026-06-02-15-29-20-342-6a1ef6d06054a12970ab896d.jpg)