Partial victory for GSK against BioNTech and Pfizer in UPC dispute

The local division The Hague ruled that BioNTech and Pfizer infringe GSK’s EP 2 590 626. The patent protects liposomes used to deliver RNA in vaccines (case ID: UPC-CFI-0001511/2025).

The panel under presiding judge Edger Brinkman upheld the patent almost in full. Only one claim was revoked. The remaining claims survived all five of the defendants’ invalidity attacks.

UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction

The scope of the injunction is striking. It covers all EPC countries where the patent is valid, with the exception of Ireland and the UK. This includes not only the 18 UPCA Contracting Member States but also seven further EU Member States, the Lugano countries Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, and several non-EU EPC states such as Turkey.

The court reached this broad territorial scope by applying the UPC’s developing long-arm jurisdiction. It rejected the defendants’ preliminary objection and found that the Pfizer and BioNTech groups operate as an interdependent, integrated and centrally controlled structure. Several entities within both groups served as anchor defendants.

Licence pressure on the manufacturers

Although the injunction is in place, the judges postponed its enforcement until after a final decision by the UPC on the validity of EP 626. More importantly, it will only take effect if BioNTech and Pfizer fail to enter into a licence agreement with GSK within three months of that decision.

The panel explicitly acknowledged GSK’s position as a non-implementer seeking monetary compensation rather than market exclusivity. This framing effectively channels the dispute towards a commercial resolution.

The defendants must also provide detailed sales information dating back to January 2020 and face an interim damages award of 2 million euros. The case value was set at 50 million euros.

For non-UPCA countries, the injunction is subject to the additional condition that the competent national courts do not hold the patent invalid. With this partial decision, the local division The Hague under presiding judge Brinkman builds on new national case law on cross-border enforcement.

Just a month ago, the District Court The Hague ruled in the dispute between Halozyme and MSD over blockbuster cancer drug Keytruda. Rather than staying the proceedings pending the outcome of foreign nullity actions, the judges adopted a conditional approach. They ruled that the cross-border injunction will lose its effect if the relevant national part of the claimed patent is revoked by the competent national court. The presiding judge in the Halozyme vs. MSD case was again Edger Brinkman.

Settlement in parallel Moderna case

Experts had also expected a decision in the parallel lawsuit brought by GSK against Moderna. The Hague division heard both proceedings one after the other at the beginning of September. But the court did not hand down a decision in the case against Moderna. Instead, the judges received a request to withdraw the claims. JUVE Patent learned this from sources close to the proceedings.

Last week, news agency Reuters reported that the two companies reached a settlement on 28 October 2026. They agreed to cross-licence each other’s patents in the field of infectious disease. No payments were exchanged. The deal covered Moderna’s Spikevax, mNEXSPIKE and RSV vaccine mResvia. The parties also moved to dismiss the US litigation with prejudice.

The Hague ruling is unlikely to be the end of the dispute. BioNTech and Pfizer can appeal and have already filed a revocation action at the UK High Court together with parallel proceedings in Ireland. Two further GSK patents,  on EP4226941 and EP4066856 , remain pending before the local division The Hague. Hearings were postponed pending EPO revocation proceedings.

Bird & Bird for GSK

GSK relies on Bird & Bird for the UPC proceedings. Dutch partners Tjibbe Douma, Nicole Jadeja, and Carlos van Staveren are assisting the pharmaceutical company. The firm has long-standing relationships with both GSK and its former cooperation partner CureVac, and is also handling the parallel Irish proceedings.

According to the UPC case search, Moderna has retained lawyer Gertjan Kuipers from Hogan Lovells Cadwalader and patent attorneys Thomas Wolter and Matthew Naylor of Mewburn Ellis. The latter are also registered as UPC representatives. Mewburn Ellis already represents Moderna in EPO opposition proceedings against GSK’s EP 941.

Hogan Lovells’ involvement has suprised many observers. In its global dispute against BioNTech and Pfizer at national courts, Moderna relies on a Freshfields team lead by Amsterdam lawyer Rutger Kleemans. But like many pharmaceutical giants, Moderna does not rely on just one law firm and has therefore engaged Hogan Lovells for the first time. In addition to Kuipers, the pan-European team is led by London partners Stephen Bennett and Dan Brook, as well as German partners Felipe Zilly and Andreas von Falck.

Powell Gilbert and Hoyng ROKH Monegier for BioNTech

The UPC case search also shows BioNTech has retained Tess Waldron and Joel Coles from UK firm Powell Gilbert. Penny Gilbert, Peter FitzPatrick and patent attorney Charlotte Malley complete the team. Powell Gilbert is involved in most of BioNTech’s ongoing disputes and also handles the Irish proceedings through its Dublin office.

BioNTech additionally relies on a Dutch-German Team of Hoyng ROKH Monegier led by Christine Kanz and Theo Blomme. ZSP partner Georg Schnappauf and Sebastian Höpfner complete BioNTech’s team on the patent attorney side.

Winston Taylor for Pfizer

Pfizer relies on its regular advisors from Winston Taylor. Brussels-based partner Christian Dekoninck leads the UPC cases, supported by counsel Geert Theuws, associates Laura Coucke and Pauline Springorum. Patent attorney Yolandi Coetzee was also involved.

A team from the London office leads the revocation claim at the UK High Court. Partner Simon Cohen leads the team supported by senior associate Thomas Witte and senior counsel Ed Vickers and Paul England. Lawyers from McCann FitzGerald’s Dublin office are leading the Irish case.

But Pfizer is working with various firms when it comes to patent disputes in Europe. A Clifford Chance team represents Pfizer in the UPC dispute with Promosone. Marks & Clerk and Clifford Chance advised the US pharma giant in the now-settled battle with GSK over RSV vaccines.