A Couple of New Articles on SEP Litigation in the UPC, Germany, and the UK

1. Matthias Leistner has posted a paper on ssrn titled The first SEP/FRAND decisions on the merits of the UPC—an overview in context.  Here is a link to the paper, and here is the abstract:

 

After a period of consolidation, in the past two years the European SEP/FRAND enforcement landscape has seen considerable movement. Significant decisions have been issued by the UPC (Local Division Mannheim – Panasonic v Oppo and shortly afterwards Local Division Munich – Huawei v Netgear) and the English Court of Appeal (most recently in Lenovo v Ericsson). In addition, the Commission intervened in a Munich SEP infringement case recommending a stricter interpretation of the Huawei v ZTE requirements. To this the Higher Regional Court Munich (Oberlandesgericht München) has since responded with an informative legal notice (Hinweisbeschluss) during the proceedings and, ultimately, a judgment nonetheless granting injunctive relief (HMD Global v VoiceAge). This case is currently under legal review before the German Federal Court of Justice, since the Higher Regional Court granted relief for an appeal in law. The focus of this contribution is on the decision of the UPC’s Local Division Mannheim, but also takes into account the judgment of the Local Division Munich and the aforementioned overall context.

This very thoughtful and detailed paper deserves wide attention.

2. Peter D. Camasesca and Konstantina E. Sideri have published an article titled Abusive Conduct of SEP Holders in Pursuing Injunctions Across Jurisdictions:  The EU Angle, 74 GRUR Int. 607 (2025).  Here is a link to the article (though you may need a subscription or institutional access), and here is the abstract:

The enforcement of a standard essential patent (SEP) has been fraught with complex legal and commercial considerations, particularly regarding the interplay between intellectual property rights and antitrust principles. SEPs occupy a unique position on the market as they support industry standards, granting their holders quasi-monopolistic power while imposing obligations to license on Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. However, these obligations often conflict with SEP holders’ desire to assert exclusivity rights, creating tension within the licensing ecosystem. This tension is amplified when SEP holders seek injunctive relief in jurisdictions like Germany while simultaneously agreeing to, or having engaged in, FRAND determinations in venues such as the UK. The issue at hand is whether pursuing injunctions in Germany while a FRAND determination is underway in another jurisdiction constitutes an abusive practice. We argue that this behavior undermines the core principles established by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Huawei v. ZTE case and represents a form of procedural manipulation that is both legally and ethically questionable.