UPC litigation - UPC 2025

Bardehle Pagenberg Barcelona, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

This German mixed IP firm started with an impressively large number of proceedings at the UPC and convinced numerous clients to file actions there when it first launched. Bardehle Pagenberg has tackled the UPC like few other law firms, having strengthened its team in advance. The firm relies on the cooperation of patent attorneys and lawyers in mixed teams, but, unlike successful teams at large international law firms, it largely avoids international representation. The German team handles the lion's share of the proceedings. Its Paris office h...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG

Munich, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at BARDEHLE PAGENBERG:

Dr. jur. Philipe Kutschke
View Profile

Dr. jur. Anna Giedke
View Profile

View all experts
Bird & Bird Amsterdam, Brüssel, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Helsinki, Milan, Munich, Paris, The Hague

JUVE Comment

Bird & Bird has IP deep in its DNA and boasts renowned teams for patent litigation in key UPC countries such as Germany, France, Finland, Italy and the Netherlands as well as in the UK. In addition, it was one of the few international law firms to adopt a mixed approach at an early stage, with lawyers and patent attorneys regularly working hand in hand. This strategy of established cross-border cooperation is now paying off at the UPC, where its expertise impressed clients from the outset.
Full Analysis
Kather Augenstein Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

Kather Augenstein has been strategically preparing for the UPC for years, and this immediately paid off when it quickly became one of the firms with the most cases. Unlike some of its competitors, the law firm's strategy had been to position itself, not through targeted acquisitions of partners, but through clever marketing and networking with international law firms.
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

KATHER AUGENSTEIN

Düsseldorf, Germany

Firm Profile
Taylor Wessing Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf, Dublin, Eindhoven, Vienna, Munich

JUVE Comment

This international law firm, whose team consists only of lawyers, has got off to an ideal start at the UPC. Many different clients are entrusting the team with extensive and complex UPC actions, and medium-sized companies also feel that their proceedings are in good hands with Taylor Wessing. For example, the team has the lead in the very extensive series of lawsuits for Abbott Laboratories over glucose-monitoring technology. The work is a prime example of the good cooperation between the teams in different jurisdictions, as the case involves l...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Taylor Wessing

London , United Kingdom

Firm Profile

Experts at Taylor Wessing:

Thomas Adocker
View Profile

Simon Cohen
View Profile

View all experts

Freshfields Amsterdam, Berlin, Dublin, Düsseldorf, London, Munich

JUVE Comment

For years, this international law firm has maintained an integrated European patent team with extensive experience in Europe-wide patent infringement proceedings. It is now putting this to good use at the UPC, where long-standing regular clients such as Novartis (against Celltrion) and Lenovo (against AsusTek) have followed. Freshfields is still one of the top representatives at the new court for a multitude of clients and is one of the few law firms that is equally well represented at the UPC in both pharmaceutical and mobile communications pr...
Full Analysis
Hogan Lovells Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, London, Milan, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

The large international law firm has a fully integrated international patent litigation practice with market-leading teams in many important UPC locations, as well as in the UK. Like competitors Bird & Bird or Freshfields, Hogan Lovells has deployed cross-border teams in pan-European proceedings for years. The firm is now continuing this strategy at the UPC, as demonstrated by the representation of long-standing client Meril Life Sciences against a claim by Edwards Lifesciences. The German team is also coordinating the overall Europe-wide d...
Full Analysis
Hoyng ROKH Monegier Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf, Lyon, Madrid, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

The international IP boutique Hoyng ROKH Monegier has been preparing intensively for the UPC for a long time. Early on it banked on mixed teams of lawyers and patent attorneys at multiple locations and specifically promoted cross-border cooperation between the individual offices in pan-European proceedings. Now Hoyng ROKH is reaping the fruits of these efforts. Thus, it has been one of the most active law firms at the UPC from the start. It has succeeded in guiding both long-standing regular clients such as Lenovo to the new court and in convin...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER

Düsseldorf, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER:

Carina Höfer
View Profile

Lars Baum
View Profile

View all experts
Powell Gilbert Dublin, London

JUVE Comment

This London-based litigation firm was an early supporter of the UPC and quickly demonstrated why it is one of the best-known patent litigation outfits in Europe. The firm’s partners are involved in various UPC disputes, which they usually conduct with local advisors. In individual cases, however, they are also active without partner law firms from other UPC countries, such as for City Glass and Glazing. In addition, Powell Gilbert’s partners often coordinate major proceedings, such as those of Edwards Lifesciences vs Meril Life Sciences regardi...
Full Analysis
Simmons & Simmons Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Milan, Munich, Paris, London

JUVE Comment

The investments that the international law firm has been making in its pan-European patent team for many years are paying off following the launch of the UPC. The goal was always to close the gap to the European market leaders, which the firm has only partially managed in national markets, but has now achieved at the UPC. Like Taylor Wessing and Bird & Bird, Simmons & Simmons is one of the most active internationally positioned law firms at the UPC.
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Simmons + Simmons LLP

London , United Kingdom

Firm Profile
Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators Amsterdam, Basel, Berlin, Düsseldorf, Munich

JUVE Comment

When the Dutch law firm Brinkhof and the German firm Vossius & Partner announced in 2022 that they would handle all UPC cases together, the aim was to be at the forefront of the UPC litigation market. Under their umbrella brand Vossius & Brinkhof UPC litigators, the two law firms have not fully accomplished this yet. Although their lawyers are jointly involved in numerous UPC proceedings, law firms such as Bardehle Pagenberg and Taylor Wessing have secured an even larger share of the UPC pie.
Full Analysis

Arnold Ruess Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

This Düsseldorf IP boutique is among those nationally independent outfits that prepared intensively for the UPC, without ceding its independence or relying on exclusive alliances. Like Kather Augenstein, Arnold Ruess instead established a team under its own steam. It now has sufficient clout to handle larger UPC cases. One in-house counsel praised the team’s "absolutely first-class legal expertise coupled with a determination to win in the courtroom". The firm makes good use of this, for example for core client Nokia in the dispute with Amazon ...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

ARNOLD RUESS

Düsseldorf, Germany

Firm Profile
August Debouzy Paris

JUVE Comment

This French firm's patent litigation team is one of the top names in its domestic market and long-standing clients are entrusting it with some of their most important lawsuits. One example is the work for Abbott against Dexcom. In the extensive UPC proceedings, August Debouzy is working with a Taylor Wessing team from several other European jurisdictions.
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Experts at August Debouzy:

François Pochart
View Profile

Grégoire Desrousseaux
View Profile
Clifford Chance Düsseldorf, Munich

JUVE Comment

Clifford Chance's strategy of bringing in strong laterals to prepare for the UPC is bearing fruit. The two renowned partners Tobias Hessel and Stefan Richter brought with them not only a wealth of experience in pan-European patent litigation, but also regular client Huawei when they moved from Hoyng ROKH Monegier at the beginning of 2023. The Chinese mobile communications provider immediately retained the team to defend it in several proceedings against Netgear. Oppo also relied on the team, which has received praise from many sides for its UPC...
Full Analysis
Cohausz & Florack Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

Cohausz & Florack was well prepared for the start of the UPC thanks to its plethora of renowned partners boasting many years of experience in cross-border litigation across a wide array of technologies. The strategy paid off. Now the outfit is now one of the most active patent attorney firms at the new court. The Düsseldorf IP boutique holds fast to its proven model of cooperating with external law firms with which it maintains long-established contacts. Well-known regular clients such as Nokia are now relying on this combination at the UPC...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

COHAUSZ & FLORACK

Düsseldorf, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at COHAUSZ & FLORACK:

Dr. Natalie Kirchhofer
View Profile

Dr. Arwed Burrichter
View Profile
Hoffmann Eitle Amsterdam, Barcelona, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Madrid, Milan, Munich, London

JUVE Comment

The German law firm played to its strength in advising life sciences companies at the UPC. It benefited from the fact that clients such as Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron/Dexcom escalated pan-European disputes to the UPC as soon as the court opened its doors. A mixed team led by lawyer Niels Hölder represented Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron in a dispute with Amgen over cholesterol-lowering drug evolocumab at the local division Munich. Hoffmann Eitle had previously assisted in national proceedings together with Carpmaels & Ransford.
Full Analysis
Maikowski & Ninnemann Berlin, Frankfurt, Leipzig, Munich

JUVE Comment

Alongside renowned pure law firms, this litigation-experienced patent attorney boutique has developed its active representative role in UPC proceedings. Clients such as HP, Lenovo, Motorola, Oppo, Phoenix Contact and Xiaomi trust the team with their UPC cases. This client list also demonstrates the team's proven expertise in mobile communications and shows that numerous regular clients also retain the firm for UPC cases. Although the patent attorneys do not act as lead main representatives in proceedings and are therefore not yet as visible as ...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Maikowski & Ninnemann

Berlin, Germany

Firm Profile
Peterreins Schley Munich

JUVE Comment

Prior to the UPC launching, this small mixed IP boutique was not a standout contender for an abundance of UPC cases. Indeed, in the court’s initial months it was barely present as its core client base among NPEs held back from filing lawsuits. However, this has changed significantly. Peterreins Schley is now one of the strongest outfits on the plaintiff side for mobile communications cases at the new court. Its most important clients at the UPC are NPE Daedalus Prime, Nera Innovations and Headwarter Research. It also filed two lawsuits against ...
Full Analysis
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Berlin, Hamburg, Mannheim, Munich, Stuttgart

JUVE Comment

Thanks to the German patent litigation team's extensive network of contacts among US clients such as Dexcom, Google and Tesla, as well as the excellent reputation of lead partner Marcus Grosch, Quinn Emanuel got off to a good start at the UPC. The German team is currently representing car manufacturer Tesla in national as well as UPC proceedings against Broadcom. The litigation for Dexcom in its major global battle with Abbott over glucose-monitoring devices is probably the biggest instruction for the German team at present and is a prime examp...
Full Analysis
Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin & Partner Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

This Düsseldorf IP boutique had adopted a wait-and-see attitude towards the UPC and refrained from strategic reinforcements or strategic alliances – strategies favoured by firms such as Bardehle Pagenberg and Vossius & Partner respectively, for example. Nevertheless, Wildanger got off to a good start and is currently one of the most active German law firms at the UPC. This success is mainly due to the strong market presence of senior partners such as Peter-Michael Weisse, who Meril Life Sciences, for example, recently consulted as co-counse...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin

Düsseldorf, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin:

Jasper Meyer zu Riemsloh, LL.M.
View Profile

Peter-Michael Weisse, LL.M.
View Profile

View all experts

Carpmaels & Ransford Dublin, London, Munich

JUVE Comment

Carpmaels & Ransford is one of the few UK firms to have made a successful start at the UPC. It was present very early on in the UPC's very first life sciences disputes, which took place before the German divisions. These include the epic battle over the cholesterol-lowering drug evolocumab/Praluent. Carpmaels & Ransford had previously advised Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron in national and EPO proceedings together with Hoffmann Eitle.
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Carpmaels & Ransford

London, United Kingdom

Firm Profile

Experts at Carpmaels & Ransford:

Jennifer Antcliff
View Profile

Simon Llewellyn
View Profile

View all experts
DLA Piper Amsterdam, Cologne, Milan, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

Despite changes to the lineup in Munich this year, the DLA team got off to a remarkable start at the UPC. The Munich team, led by Constanze Krenz, is involved in an astonishingly high number of proceedings at the new court. The litigation for Dyson concerning handheld vacuum cleaners and for Belkin regarding an SEP for wireless chargers stands out due to its size and complexity.
Full Analysis
Eisenführ Speiser Bremen, Hamburg, Munich

JUVE Comment

The mixed team of this German law firm has got stuck in at the UPC with a considerable number of actions. By representing clients such as Headwater in proceedings against Motorola Mobility and Samsung over mobile handsets, Eisenführ Speiser shows its extensive experience in mobile communications patents is winning over new clients, also for UPC proceedings. In addition, companies from various other sectors trust the team, particularly when it comes to mechanics and electronics patents. For example, the practice is active for core client BEGO Me...
Full Analysis
Grünecker Berlin, Cologne, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

This mixed law firm had a good start in the initial months of the UPC. Immediately after the new court opened, Grünecker filed a suit for its core client Broadcom/Avago against Tesla at the local division Munich over chips for automotive application. It was clear the action would not be a one-hit wonder as the small litigation team had already repeatedly represented the semiconductor manufacturer in multiple actions against car manufacturers at German courts. Recently, Grünecker filed a second UPC complaint against Stellantis and Opel. However,...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Grünecker

Munich, Germany

Firm Profile
Krieger Mes Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

This well-known Düsseldorf-based litigation firm had a reasonable start in the first 18 months of the UPC. Krieger Mes took a wait-and-see approach to the court; rather than forming any strategic alliances like some of its competitors, the firm emphasised its independence. Now, it is active in six proceedings at the new court for some innovative medium-sized companies.
Full Analysis
Rospatt Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

This well-known Düsseldorf IP litigation firm has established a solid presence at the new court. It mainly represents medium-sized companies at the local divisions in Düsseldorf and Munich. Rospatt’s experienced litigators operate across a broad, but rather classic, technical spectrum on the defendant side, for example for Knaus Tabbert over caravans, XSYS over printing technology, Q-Tech over measurement technology, and Industria Lombarda Materiale Elettrico over electrical controllers.
Full Analysis
Thum & Partner Konstanz, Munich

JUVE Comment

This small but excellent litigation boutique of patent attorneys is often called in as an additional firm by clients in their extensive and complex UPC litigation series. Clients particularly appreciate the technical expertise of the patent attorneys in medtech, as well as in related technologies such as vaping, which Thum & Partner combines with its many years of experience in complex EPO oppositions. The notable clients thus make targeted use of the IP boutique to supplement their counsel for individual patents in litigation series coordi...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Thum&Partner

München, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at Thum&Partner:

Andreas Mötsch
View Profile

Sebastian Schneller
View Profile

View all experts

A&O Shearman Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

For this international law firm, the investments of recent years in the German patent litigation team have paid off, as evidenced by its strong position in UPC proceedings involving electronics and mobile communications patents. In the UPC’s initial months, the firm was heavily involved in proceedings concerning semiconductors and mobile communications for Samsung and Nokia. Some of the proceedings were quickly settled out of court, such as Samsung Electronics’ and Samsung Semiconductors’ dispute with Network Systems Technologies, and the dispu...
Full Analysis
CBH Rechtsanwälte Cologne, Munich

JUVE Comment

The IP team of this full-service German law firm is valued by its SME client base for its extensive litigation experience across a wide range of technical fields. The lawyers represent several of these long-standing clients in UPC proceedings. For example, a Munich team is now representing Phoenix Contact in the UPC proceedings against ILME, having previously represented the company in a national dispute against Harting, which included a question referred to the CJEU.
Full Analysis
Dehns Brighton, Bristol, London, Manchester, Munich, Oxford

JUVE Comment

Thanks to its close ties to core clients, this patent attorney firm was one of the few UK firms to be present at the UPC from an early stage. Laura Ramsay, for example, advised AutoStore in its dispute with Ocado together with other law firms even before the UPC launch. She and her team worked in the background in other national proceedings in which other law firms had the lead. When Ocado then took the fight to the UPC, Ramsay was a main representative in one of three proceedings. In the end, however, the UPC case did not reach the courtroom b...
Full Analysis
J A Kemp Cambridge, London, Oxford, Paris

JUVE Comment

The UK patent attorney firm has a well-known focus on advising pharmaceutical and biotech companies. It continued this work at the UPC. Right from the start, its regular clients Healios and Osaka University involved the firm in revocation actions brought by Astellas over two biotech patents. The patent attorneys had already defended both patents against Astellas' challenges at the EPO. The two proceedings at the Munich central division are so far the only UPC cases in which the firm’s partners are the main representatives. Nevertheless, like it...
Full Analysis
Marks & Clerk Aberdeen, Birmingham, Cambridge, Edinbrugh, Glasgow, London, Luxembourg, Manchester, Oxfort

JUVE Comment

As this UK firm’s lawyers are not yet admitted to the UPC, it must instead deploy its large patent attorney team at the new court, and yet Marks & Clerk still made a successful start in litigation here. It skilfully leveraged its strong position in the life sciences industry to be present at the UPC in the few but large-volume, high-stakes proceedings in this field. A mixed team had already represented Pfizer in national disputes with GSK regarding features of RSV vaccines. Now the patent attorneys are acting as the main representatives in ...
Full Analysis
Meissner Bolte Bremen, Düsseldorf, Hannover, Hamburg, Hebden Bridge, Ludwigshafen München, Nürnberg, Schorndorf

JUVE Comment

This mixed law firm saw some turbulence in the lead up to the UPC, including some departures of lawyers and numerous arrivals of patent attorneys, and yet Meissner Bolte got off to a surprisingly good start at the UPC. The firm’s patent attorneys are involved in three separate revocation actions at the central division, namely for Bitzer concerning a cold chain monitoring patent, for inventor Manuela Hoffmann concerning a woodworking machine, and Combisafe concerning a post holder. The latter was lately settled. The clients are typical medium-s...
Full Analysis

Sponsored Content

Meissner Bolte Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB

München, Germany

Firm Profile

Experts at Meissner Bolte Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB:

Dr. Jasper C. Werhahn
View Profile

Andreas Kabisch
View Profile

View all experts
Preu Bohlig & Partner Berlin, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

The lawyers at this medium-sized law firm have been actively representing their regular clients in proceedings since the UPC was established. However, in January 2025, the Hamburg team will break away and establish a new law firm together with two lawyers in Paris and a partner in Munich. The new outfit, under the name Bonabry, will comprise three partners in Hamburg, including Daniel Hoppe, who is currently conducting the proceedings for Stada against Sanofi over cabazitaxel, and Konstantin Schallmoser. The latter is currently conducting many ...
Full Analysis
Samson & Partner Munich

JUVE Comment

The patent attorneys at this independent Munich IP boutique have extensive experience in national and EPO proceedings, particularly concerning IT and mobile communications. They are now successfully applying this expertise at the UPC, for example for Netgear and Keysight, which they previously represented in national cases. Samson banks on established contacts with law firms, such as Freshfields and Hoyng ROKH Monegier, whose litigators lead the legal part of proceedings.
Full Analysis
Sandart & Partners Stockholm

JUVE Comment

This Swedish IP boutique has established itself at the UPC primarily as a local partner for proceedings at the Nordic Baltic division. In this context, the firm's long-standing close contacts with law firms in Europe are an advantage. It already cooperates with some of these in pan-European patent proceedings. One example is the work for Meril Life Sciences against Edwards Lifesciences – Hogan Lovells called on the services of the Stockholm IP boutique for the proceedings at the Nordic Baltic Regional division. Stockholm-based lawyer and former...
Full Analysis
Torggler & Hofmann Innsbruck

JUVE Comment

The two patent attorneys Markus Gangl and Florian Robl at this pure patent law firm in Innsbruck are attracting attention with their representation of SME core clients at the UPC. They work in all their proceedings as a duo without lawyers. Before the UPC launched, the fact that patent attorneys could represent medium-sized clients at the court without the involvement of lawyers was a source of misgiving for many law firms, calling their business models into question. This is precisely what makes Torggler & Hofmann so successful. In additio...
Full Analysis
Trevisan & Cuonzo Milan, Rome

JUVE Comment

The Italian IP firm Trevisan & Cuonzo is one of the leading litigation practices for pan-European proceedings at national courts in Italy. From this position, it is also the first port of call for clients who want to use the UPC courts in Milan and seek local representatives outside of internationally integrated law firms. So far, however, the team has only been involved in two proceedings on the defendant side, namely for AutoStore against Ocado, which was quickly settled. The low number of cases is partly because, so far, the Milan divisi...
Full Analysis

Name	Borlabs Cookie
Provider	Owner of this website, Imprint
Purpose	Saves the visitors preferences selected in the Cookie Box of Borlabs Cookie.
Cookie Name	borlabs-cookie
Cookie Expiry	1 Year

Name	Google Tag Manager
Provider	Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland
Purpose	Cookie by Google used to control advanced script and event handling.
Privacy Policy	https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en
Cookie Name	_ga,_gat,_gid
Cookie Expiry	1 Year

Accept	Google Analytics
Name	Google Analytics
Provider	Google LLC
Purpose	Cookie by Google used for website analytics. Generates statistical data on how the visitor uses the website.
Privacy Policy	https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en
Cookie Name	_ga,_gat,_gid
Cookie Expiry	1 Year

Accept	Google Analytics 4
Name	Google Analytics 4
Provider	Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland
Purpose	Cookie by Google used for website analytics. Generates statistical data on how the visitor uses the website.
Privacy Policy	https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en
Cookie Name	_ga,_gat,_gid
Cookie Expiry	2 Months

Accept	Hotjar
Name	Hotjar
Provider	Hotjar Ltd., Dragonara Business Centre, 5th Floor, Dragonara Road, Paceville St Julian's STJ 3141 Malta
Purpose	Hotjar is an user behavior analytic tool by Hotjar Ltd.. We use Hotjar to understand how users interact with our website.
Privacy Policy	https://www.hotjar.com/legal/policies/privacy/
Host(s)	*.hotjar.com
Cookie Name	_hjClosedSurveyInvites, _hjDonePolls, _hjMinimizedPolls, _hjDoneTestersWidgets, _hjIncludedInSample, _hjShownFeedbackMessage, _hjid, _hjRecordingLastActivity, hjTLDTest, _hjUserAttributesHash, _hjCachedUserAttributes, _hjLocalStorageTest, _hjptid
Cookie Expiry	Session / 1 Year

UPC litigation – UPC 2025

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG

Dr. jur. Philipe Kutschke

Dr. jur. Anna Giedke

KATHER AUGENSTEIN

Taylor Wessing

Thomas Adocker

Simon Cohen

HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER

Carina Höfer

Lars Baum

Simmons + Simmons LLP

ARNOLD RUESS

François Pochart

Grégoire Desrousseaux

COHAUSZ & FLORACK

Dr. Natalie Kirchhofer

Dr. Arwed Burrichter

Maikowski & Ninnemann

Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin

Jasper Meyer zu Riemsloh, LL.M.

Peter-Michael Weisse, LL.M.

Carpmaels & Ransford

Jennifer Antcliff

Simon Llewellyn

Grünecker

Thum&Partner

Andreas Mötsch

Sebastian Schneller

Meissner Bolte Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB

Dr. Jasper C. Werhahn

Andreas Kabisch

Ranking Overview

Further Rankings

Leading Individuals

Awards

Accept	Facebook
Name	Facebook
Provider	Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, 4 Grand Canal Square, Dublin 2, Ireland
Purpose	Used to unblock Facebook content.
Privacy Policy	https://www.facebook.com/privacy/explanation
Host(s)	.facebook.com

Accept	OpenStreetMap
Name	OpenStreetMap
Provider	Openstreetmap Foundation, St John’s Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS, United Kingdom
Purpose	Used to unblock OpenStreetMap content.
Privacy Policy	https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_Policy
Host(s)	.openstreetmap.org
Cookie Name	_osm_location, _osm_session, _osm_totp_token, _osm_welcome, _pk_id., _pk_ref., _pk_ses., qos_token
Cookie Expiry	1-10 Years

Accept	Twitter
Name	Twitter
Provider	Twitter International Company, One Cumberland Place, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, D02 AX07, Ireland
Purpose	Used to unblock Twitter content.
Privacy Policy	https://twitter.com/privacy
Host(s)	.twimg.com, .twitter.com
Cookie Name	__widgetsettings, local_storage_support_test
Cookie Expiry	Unlimited

Accept	Vimeo
Name	Vimeo
Provider	Vimeo Inc., 555 West 18th Street, New York, New York 10011, USA
Purpose	Used to unblock Vimeo content.
Privacy Policy	https://vimeo.com/privacy
Host(s)	player.vimeo.com
Cookie Name	vuid
Cookie Expiry	2 Years

UPC litigation – UPC 2025

Bardehle Pagenberg Barcelona, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG

Experts at BARDEHLE PAGENBERG:

Dr. jur. Philipe Kutschke

Dr. jur. Anna Giedke

Bird & Bird Amsterdam, Brüssel, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Helsinki, Milan, Munich, Paris, The Hague

JUVE Comment

Kather Augenstein Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

KATHER AUGENSTEIN

Taylor Wessing Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf, Dublin, Eindhoven, Vienna, Munich

JUVE Comment

Taylor Wessing

Experts at Taylor Wessing:

Thomas Adocker

Simon Cohen

Freshfields Amsterdam, Berlin, Dublin, Düsseldorf, London, Munich

JUVE Comment

Hogan Lovells Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, London, Milan, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

Hoyng ROKH Monegier Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf, Lyon, Madrid, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER

Experts at HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER:

Carina Höfer

Lars Baum

Powell Gilbert Dublin, London

JUVE Comment

Simmons & Simmons Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Milan, Munich, Paris, London

JUVE Comment

Simmons + Simmons LLP

Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators Amsterdam, Basel, Berlin, Düsseldorf, Munich

JUVE Comment

Arnold Ruess Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

ARNOLD RUESS

August Debouzy Paris

JUVE Comment

Experts at August Debouzy:

François Pochart

Grégoire Desrousseaux

Clifford Chance Düsseldorf, Munich

JUVE Comment

Cohausz & Florack Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

COHAUSZ & FLORACK

Experts at COHAUSZ & FLORACK:

Dr. Natalie Kirchhofer

Dr. Arwed Burrichter

Hoffmann Eitle Amsterdam, Barcelona, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Madrid, Milan, Munich, London

JUVE Comment

Maikowski & Ninnemann Berlin, Frankfurt, Leipzig, Munich

JUVE Comment

Maikowski & Ninnemann

Peterreins Schley Munich

JUVE Comment

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Berlin, Hamburg, Mannheim, Munich, Stuttgart

JUVE Comment

Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin & Partner Düsseldorf

JUVE Comment

Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin

Experts at Wildanger Kehrwald Graf v. Schwerin:

Jasper Meyer zu Riemsloh, LL.M.

Peter-Michael Weisse, LL.M.

Carpmaels & Ransford Dublin, London, Munich

JUVE Comment

Carpmaels & Ransford

Experts at Carpmaels & Ransford:

Jennifer Antcliff

Simon Llewellyn

DLA Piper Amsterdam, Cologne, Milan, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

Eisenführ Speiser Bremen, Hamburg, Munich

JUVE Comment

Grünecker Berlin, Cologne, Munich, Paris

JUVE Comment

Grünecker

Krieger Mes Düsseldorf