As the UPC enters its third year, litigants are increasingly testing the interplay between UPC actions and EPO oppositions. While UPC decisions are not binding on the EPO, both institutions stress the need for legal certainty and efficiency—yet divergent outcomes are still possible. This session examines how parties are using parallel tracks not only to defend or attack patents but also to shape settlement dynamics, licensing leverage, and litigation timing.

• Understand when the UPC is likely to stay proceedings in light of parallel EPO oppositions, including guidance from Astellas v. Healios, Toyota Motor v. Neo Wireless, Carrier v. Bitzer and Edwards v. Meril.
• Analyse the strategic implications of conflicting outcomes where the UPC and EPO maintain different amended forms of a patent.
• Explore tactical advantages for opponents in filing both EPO oppositions and UPC revocation actions, including accelerated proceedings and increased pressure on patentees.
• Evaluate how timing choices—whether simultaneous filings or staggered actions—can influence settlement leverage and long-term portfolio strategy.