In a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for patent holders and print technology developers alike, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has ruled that its jurisdiction extends to alleged acts of infringement that took place before the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) came into force.

The case involved a dispute between ESKO-Graphics and XSYS over EP 3 742 231 B1, a European patent that had initially been opted out of the UPC system, then later rejoined when the opt-out was withdrawn. At issue was whether the UPC could hear infringement claims dating from before the opt-out was withdrawn—and even prior to the official start of the UPCA.

The Court held that the UPC's jurisdiction is not bound by time limitations. Specifically, it ruled that alleged infringements both before the UPCA’s enactment and during the interim between a patent’s opt-out and its reentry into the UPC system still fall under the court's authority. This interpretation effectively allows the UPC to assert retroactive competence over previously excluded cases.

Importantly for stakeholders in the print and packaging industries, where intellectual property plays a vital role in equipment, software, and process innovation, the decision underscores the need for strategic clarity around patent opt-outs and UPC jurisdiction during the transition period. Even if a patent was once opted out, withdrawing that opt-out reestablishes full UPC oversight—as though the patent had always been under its jurisdiction.

The key takeaways are that the Unified Patent Court (UPC) can hear cases involving alleged patent infringement even if the acts occurred before the UPCA came into force. If a patent opt-out is withdrawn, the UPC regains full jurisdiction over both past and future actions, with no time restrictions. While national courts and the UPC operate in parallel during the transitional period, the withdrawal of an opt-out restores the UPC’s exclusive competence over the patent.