UPC Court of Appeal rules on damages in Oerlikon vs Bhagat
In a dispute between texturing and winding machine manufacturers Oerlikon Textile and Bhagat Textile Engineers, the Court of Appeal has reached a decision on damages and costs. The court also commented on the issue of reputational harm.
15 December 2025 by Christina Schulze
The dispute began at the ITMA textile and garment technology trade fair in Rho, near Milan, in June 2023. Bhagat and Oerlikon compete in the market for texturing and winding machines.
The case concerns EP 2 145 848, which protects a false twist texturing machine. Patent holder Oerlikon received the patent in autumn 2011.
In November 2024, the UPC Milan local division ruled that Bhagat had infringed Oerlikon’s patent (case IDs: ACT 549585/2023, UPC_CFI_ 241/2023). The court ordered Bhagat to recall the machines and pay damages.
Bhagat did not deny infringement or challenge the patent’s validity, but argued Oerlikon had not suffered damages. Bhagat also sought to stay proceedings due to parallel validity proceedings in which it was not a party.
The Milan court set the litigation value at €750,000 and ordered Bhagat to pay 80% of costs (case ID: ORD_598484/2023). It further ordered Bhagat to pay €77,064.65 in costs to Oerlikon within one month (Milan local division costs decision of 9 May 2025, ORD_22179/2025).
Decision overturned
Bhagat appealed on 6 January 2025. The Court of Appeal ordered Bhagat to pay €19,000 security for costs, which it did before the hearing. The Court of Appeal has now overturned the first-instance decision ordering Bhagat to pay €15,000 provisional damages to Oerlikon (case ID: UPC_CoA_8/2025).
The judgment states, “Considering that Bhagat has succeeded only in part in its appeal and that it withdrew its requests concerning the stay of proceedings and the value of proceedings in first instance at the stage of the oral hearing only, while Oerlikon failed on the award of damages in the appeal proceedings, the Court of Appeal orders, pursuant to Art. 69(2) UPCA, that costs be apportioned equitably and that, in the appeal proceedings, Bhagat bears 80% of Oerlikon costs and Oerlikon bears 20% of Bhagat costs and court fees.”
The judgment also considered potential reputational harm to Oerlikon, but did not find it proven.
Powell Gilbert for Bhagat
A team led by Peter FitzPatrick from Powell Gilbert represents Bhagat Textile Engineers. Niccolò Ferretti Emanuela Gaia Zapparoli from the Italian firm Nunziante Magrone are also representing Bhagat. At the first instance Trevisan & Cuonzo also represented the company.
-
- Peter Fitzpatrick
-
- Stefania Bergia
A team led by Stefania Bergia from Simmons & Simmons in Italy represents the German company Oerlikon Textile. The team includes Anna Colmano, Alessandro Zullo, and Florian Laus.
The panel comprised president of the Court of Appeal Klaus Grabinski, legally qualified judge and judge-rapporteur Emmanuel Gougé, legally qualified judge Emanuela Germano and technically qualified judges Giorgio Checcacci and Stefan Wilhelm.
