In a recent order (ORD_41174/2024), the Paris Central Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) ruled on confidentiality and representative independence.

In the patent case, Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy sought confidentiality protections against Microsoft. While the UPC confirmed the need to keep certain information confidential, it found Suinno’s application invalid due to a lack of representative independence because Suinno’s representative, as the main shareholder and managing director, had extensive administrative powers within Suinno.

Highly relevant, the UPC panel further found that the requirement of independence according to the relevant case law of the European Court of Justice as well the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union implies that a party also cannot be represented by an employed representative. This finding aligns with Article 48(5) of the UPC Agreement, requiring legal representatives not to have significant financial ties to their clients. Thus, in-house attorneys cannot represent their employers before the UPC, and neither can owners of companies.

This decision, which might be appealed, has implications for all parties to UPC proceedings, especially for smaller firms with limited resources for external representation.

aera boasts a strong team of ten qualified UPC representatives ready to assist parties of all sizes in UPC proceedings. Read more here.