Powell Gilbert receives trophy

Powell Gilbert’s UPC story began with a disappointment. After Brexit, London patent firms like Powell Gilbert had hoped that the UK would continue to participate in the UPC project. But in February 2020, a government spokesperson dashed the hopes of UK patent litigators and judges. Lawyer and patent attorney firms in London were perplexed and disillusioned.

“We were all very disappointed when the UK withdrew from the UPC project. We had invested a lot of time and effort in convincing our government of the advantages of the new court,” says the firm’s name partner Penny Gilbert.

From one moment to the next, the firm had to readjust its strategy. “Not being able to participate in the UPC would have left a gap in our offering, given the amount of work that we do for clients on strategy and coordination of pan-European and global patent litigation campaigns,” says Gilbert. “But after many discussions — and brain storming sessions over glasses of good wine! — we eventually charted our course to participate in the UPC.”

Overcoming disappointment

Today, 19 months after the court’s official launch, Powell Gilbert is one of the most present law firms in UPC litigation. In December, the JUVE Patent editorial team distinguished the firm with its new UPC Firm of the Year award.

The laudation praises, “No UK law firm currently has as strong a presence at the UPC as Powell Gilbert. Whether for Asus, AIM Sport, Ocado or Edwards Lifesciences, the London litigation firm was active in many of the UPC’s first cases. None of its rivals from London have managed this, and only a handful of its continental competitors can boast of having a stronger presence.”

“The delayed start due to the German constitutional complaint helped us”

Powell Gilbert has gone from being almost out of the picture to a veritable part of the new business. The road was long, but some circumstances played into the London firm’s hands. “We had time to amend our strategy after the government’s announcement. The delayed start of the UPC due to the German constitutional complaint helped us,” says Alex Wilson, co-founder of Powell Gilbert. “We were always confident that we would play some kind of role in UPC litigation. We never discussed whether we should focus only on UK patent litigation.”

Early Christmas present

The trophy arrived at the firm’s headquarters on Fleet Street just before Christmas. Many employees were already on vacation when the package arrived from Germany, though with the UPC’s tight deadlines and lack of vacation days, some had to work right up to the last minute.

Alex Wilson found the parcel on his desk one morning and initially thought it was one of the usual thank-you bottles of wine from a client. In fact it was the trophy for the UPC Firm of the Year award.

Powell Gilbert partner Siddharth Kusumakar unwraps the trophy once again for the photographers, surrounded by other partners and employees. @Powell Gilbert

JUVE Patent will present the award on an annual basis. As the award’s first recipient, Powell Gilbert topped a list of strong international candidates, including Kather Augenstein, Thum & Partner, Troggler & Hofmann and Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators.

Lauded strategy

The consistency with which the firm implemented its strategy particularly impressed JUVE Patent’s editors.

According to the laudation, “After the Brexit vote in 2016, it was by no means certain whether UK lawyers would even be allowed to participate in the UPC. However, the Powell Gilbert partners were aware that in the future, Europe-wide coordination of large-volume proceedings — one of the firm’s strengths — would only be awarded to law firms with UPC expertise. They have since creatively and impressively sought their way to the UPC.

“They have creatively and impressively sought their way to the UPC”

They were quick to take advantage of the Irish route and opened an office in Dublin, where 15 lawyers are now admitted to practise in Ireland and thus also at the UPC.

Some competitors consider this a risky strategy because Ireland has not yet ratified the UPC Agreement. But the vast presence of Powell Gilbert partners in UPC proceedings where millions of euros are at stake, such as for Edwards Lifesciences against Meril Life Sciences concerning heart valves, but also for the Indian SME Bhagat Group regarding textile machinery, proves this was the right step.”

Ubiquitous presence

JUVE Patent editors also emphasised the firm’s vast presence across the court’s various divisions and their ability to lead oral hearings alone. The laudation continues, “Powell Gilbert has been active at a plethora of UPC divisions — something of which few of its rivals can boast. The firm spreads the work across many shoulders, rather than those of a sole senior partner. Simon Ayrton, Siddharth Kusumakar, Ari Laakkonen, Bryce Matthewson, Tom Oliver, Alex Wilson and Joel Coles are all equally present. Kusumakar and Laakkonen achieved important successes at the UPC for their clients Edwards Lifesciences and AIM Sport.

The UK solicitors are not afraid of new challenges; for the first time they no longer need to let UK barristers take precedence in the courtroom but can plead themselves at the UPC. The Powell Gilbert partners usually work with local advisors from their large and well-maintained network of European patent litigators. Now, they are entering the ring alone for the first time to represent City Glass and Glazing at a local division.”

Joyous end to the year

JUVE Patent published the nominees on 4 December 2024. “We were delighted when we found out that we were shortlisted for the UPC award and then getting the trophy was a fantastic way to end a very busy year”, says partner Pete Damerell.

One week later, JUVE Patent published the first UPC ranking and announced Powell Gilbert as the winner.

The trophy arrived in London just in time for Christmas. ©JUVE Verlag

Those still in the office spontaneously joined in the celebrations when the trophy arrived. Siddharth Kusumakar, Bethan Hopewell, Tom Oliver, for example, but also Zoe Buttler, Pete Damerell, Ari Laakkonen, Alex Wilson and many other associates and staff.

First impressions

Since 2019, the firm has grown from 28 to 34 lawyers and 15 of these are UPC representatives. “The way we work together as a team has not changed as a result of the UPC. We decide how to proceed on a case-by-case basis, irrespective of whether they are national cases, EPO proceedings or UPC cases.  However, because of the frontloaded nature of UPC cases, we find that larger teams are often required, and can utilise our large team of patent litigators to achieve that,” says Alex Wilson.

Even the change in role to main representatives in oral hearings — which UK solicitors normally leave to the barristers in national proceedings — did not present them with any difficulties. “We are used to advocacy in EPO proceedings,” says Gilbert.

“The way UPC judges handle cases makes it easy for younger lawyers to plead”

“Compared to traditional court proceedings in the UK, the UPC judges handle their cases quite openly and are flexible. That makes it easier for us to plead UPC cases,” says Wilson. The senior partner has already pleaded his first case before the Lisbon local division in Ericsson vs AsusTech. “The way they handle UPC cases makes it especially easy for younger lawyers to plead their cases,” he adds.

That the UPC got off to a good start has also made things easier for the lawyers, the partners are certain. “So far we are impressed with the quality of the UPC judges. They work together impressively. They are all pulling in the same direction with a willingness to make the system work effectively,” says Gilbert.