UPC-COA-0000918/2025

Rule 222.2 RoP does not prevent a party from submitting a new legal argument on appeal when the argument is based on facts and evidence submitted to the Court of First Instance.

When exercising discretion under Rule 222.2 RoP over new submissions, the Court takes into account whether they could reasonably have been made before the Court of First Instance, their relevance to the appeal, and the position of the other party.

A general reference on appeal to submissions made at first instance is sufficient only if, and to the extent that, the impugned decision does not address the matters referred to.

Under Article 69 EPC and the Protocol on the Interpretation of Article 69 EPC, the patent claim is the starting point and decisive basis for determining protective scope, while the description and drawings must always be used as explanatory aids and the claim must be interpreted from the skilled person’s perspective.

Claim features must be interpreted in the light of the claim as a whole, and a patent specification’s distinction from specifically described prior art may be relevant where the specification clearly identifies both the distinction and the feature by which it is achieved.

For the Unified Patent Court’s inventive-step assessment, the objective problem is established from the skilled person’s perspective and common general knowledge at the relevant date by comparing the claim as a whole with the prior art, without hindsight, and the claimed solution is obvious only if the skilled person would, not merely could, have arrived at it from a realistic starting point.