Patent Litigation in France: the Paris Court and the UPC

Where patent disputes are heard in France

France is unusual in how tightly it concentrates patent work. Rather than spreading disputes across many regional courts, the system channels civil patent litigation to a single specialised venue in the capital, the tribunal judiciaire de Paris (the Paris Judicial Court). Dedicated chambers there hear infringement and validity actions, and national appeals run to the Paris Court of Appeal. That concentration means the judges see a high volume of technical cases and the case law develops with some consistency, which matters when you are weighing how a claim is likely to be read.

For a rights holder, this makes forum selection in France relatively simple at the national level: you are, in practice, litigating in Paris. The harder questions are procedural and strategic, such as how to gather evidence of infringement, whether to seek preliminary measures, and how validity will be tested if the defendant counterclaims. France is well known for the saisie-contrefaçon, a court-authorised infringement seizure that lets a patentee collect evidence before or alongside a claim. It is a powerful tool, and getting it right is a job for French IP counsel, because the way the seizure is requested and executed can shape the whole case.

The Paris seat of the Unified Patent Court

Sitting alongside the national court is a different animal entirely: the Unified Patent Court (UPC). Paris is the seat of the Central Division of the UPC Court of First Instance, with further sections in Munich and Milan, and Paris also hosts a UPC local division. The UPC is a cross-border court created by an international agreement open only to participating EU member states, and it is not part of the French national court system. Not every EU country takes part, so its reach is narrower than "Europe" as a whole. Keeping the two systems apart is essential, because they apply different rules, have different judges, and reach across different territories. Note in particular that appeals from the UPC go to the UPC Court of Appeal in Luxembourg, not to the Paris Court of Appeal.

The UPC has jurisdiction over European patents (both classical bundle patents and those with unitary effect, the Unitary Patents) in the participating EU member states, unless the patent has been opted out of the UPC system. That opt-out point is the hinge of many decisions. During the transitional arrangements, a classical European patent that has not been opted out sits under concurrent jurisdiction, meaning a claimant may bring the dispute either before the UPC or before the national court, here the tribunal judiciaire de Paris. If that patent is opted out, the UPC route is closed and the dispute belongs in the national court alone. A Unitary Patent, by contrast, cannot be opted out and always falls within the UPC. Whether a given patent is in or out of the UPC is a fact you should verify early, because it determines which doors are even open to you. For the wider picture of Unitary Patents and how the UPC fits together, see the overview of the Unitary Patent and the UPC.

Choosing between the national and UPC routes

The choice is rarely abstract; it turns on the specific patent and what you are trying to achieve. A national action before the Paris court affects France alone, which can be exactly what you want if the infringement is French and you prefer a familiar forum with settled local procedure. A UPC action can reach infringement across multiple participating states in one set of proceedings, which is attractive when the problem is genuinely pan-European, though it also exposes a Unitary Patent or an un-opted-out European patent to central revocation in a single stroke.

Defendants weigh the mirror image of this. If you are met with a UPC infringement claim, a central counterclaim for revocation may knock out the patent across the participating states covered by the proceedings at once, which raises the stakes on both sides. A validation of the same European patent in a non-UPC territory would be untouched by that revocation, so the sweep is real but bounded. If the patent has been opted out, that route may be closed and the dispute belongs in the national court instead. These are finely balanced calls that depend on the patent portfolio, the commercial map of the alleged infringement, and timing, so treat them as questions for a qualified professional rather than as fixed rules.

Timeframes and costs also differ between the routes, and both are moving targets. The UPC is designed to run to its own procedural calendar, and the French court has its own rhythm; official fees apply in both, and these change. Do not rely on any figure or deadline you read second-hand. Confirm the current amount with the French courts and the Unified Patent Court or local counsel, and confirm any procedural period the same way rather than treating a stated period as settled.

Getting the right help

IPEnvoy is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice; this is general information. Patent litigation in France, whether before the Paris national court or the Paris seat of the UPC, is high-stakes and procedurally demanding, and small early choices about forum and opt-out status carry through the whole case. Confirm the current position with the French courts and the Unified Patent Court and a qualified local IP professional before you act. If you would like to be introduced to vetted French and European patent litigators who handle both the national and UPC routes, IPEnvoy can help point you to the right local expertise.