For decades, cross border patent injunctions were the exception in Europe; now they are rapidly moving centre stage. The UPC is testing the limits of its long arm. 

Applying the CJEU’s 2025 decision in BSH v Electrolux, local divisions such as Munich, Mannheim, Düsseldorf and The Hague are asserting jurisdiction over infringement of European patents in non UPC states – including the UK, Spain and Poland – where at least one defendant is domiciled in a UPC Member State or closely connected to an EU distributor or representative. 

At the same time, UK courts continue to set worldwide FRAND licence terms and grant interim licences, while US courts combine broad personal jurisdiction over foreign manufacturers with a strict presumption against extraterritoriality in patent law, and Chinese courts deploy anti suit and anti- anti suit injunctions and global rate setting to influence SEP disputes far beyond China’s borders.

This working session is about what this means in practice. 

• What factors actually matter when you ask a UPC, UK, US or PRC court for a long arm order – and what does it mean, in concrete terms, to seek relief that reaches patents or proceedings in countries that have not joined the UPC?
• How, and where, can these orders be enforced, and will they stand up when tested on appeal or in other jurisdictions?
• Most importantly, what are the implications for clients’ forum choice, risk, leverage and settlement strategy when multiple courts claim the power to decide disputes, or fix licence terms, far beyond their own borders?