JUVE Comment

Building on its extensive experience in continent-wide infringement proceedings, the patent practice of this international law firm has established itself as a strong UPC representative. From the beginning, Freshfields translated its long-standing relationship to clients such as Novartis, HP and Lenovo to the UPC, representing them in major disputes. For example, the team represented Novartis and Regeneron in high-profile pharma cases such as against Celltrion over asthma drug Xolair (omalizumab), and against Accord over the administration of nilotinib with apple sauce. These (now settled) cases helped establish Freshfields as an active firm for pharma disputes at the UPC when these were still a rarity. The practice has continued to attract other high-profile clients such as Apple, and Moderna in its dispute with Arbutus and Genevant. These demonstrate the firm’s strong position in both life sciences and mobile communications proceedings.

Clients value the well-established collaboration between Freshfields’ national teams, which they are familiar with from previous pan-European proceedings. UPC cases have significantly strengthened these connections along the Munich-Düsseldorf-Amsterdam-London axis. This integrated approach is exemplified by the work for Moderna, where teams across all three jurisdictions are involved. Apple also retains a German-Dutch-British team for its dispute against Headwater, whilst Xiaomi relies on the cross-border expertise of partners from the Düsseldorf and Amsterdam offices in proceedings against Ueran.

The teams in Düsseldorf and Munich remain particularly prominent, often handling parallel national court proceedings. With a growing number of cases for major international clients, Freshfields is narrowing the gap with market leaders such as Bird & Bird and Taylor Wessing. The firm’s established US presence could further bolster its UPC litigation practice if US clients increasingly turn to the European court for global litigation strategies or, like Apple, face NPE actions there.

Strengths

UPC litigation regarding pharmaceuticals (for originators) and telecoms (for implementers).

Recommended individuals

Nina Bayerl (“excellent UPC litigation lawyer”, “impressive knowledge of strategic options under the UPCA”, competitors), Corin Gittinger (“outstanding litigation strategist and a great team leader”, competitor), Prinz Wolrad zu Waldeck und Pyrmont (“very experienced and convincing trial lawyer, highly recommended for high-stakes SEP cases”, competitor)

Team

28 lawyers

Clients

Apple and Motorola against Headwater Research over device-side management of network capacity; Xiaomi against Ueran Technology over cellular patents; Hisense against NEC over video coding; Hisense against Corning over glass-sheet manufacturing; HP against Huawei over wi-fi 6 standard; HP against Dolby and Nokia over video coding; Lenovo/Motorola against Asus and Innovative Sonic over mobile phone SEPs; Netgear against Huawei over wi-fi 6 (settled 2025); Hoffmann-La Roche against Organon over biosimilar Perjeta; Becton Dickinson Rowa against Knapp Smart Solutions over pharma supply; Moderna against Arbutus and Genevant over pharmaceuticals; Alexion against Amgen and Samsung Bioepis over orphan drug eculizumab/Bekemv; Kodak against FujiFilm over printing plate precursors.