Switzerland steps up: Federal Patent Court affirms cross-border reach in patent litigation
Switzerland as a forum for cross-border patent enforcement: the Federal Patent Court confirms its reach
In a landmark decision of 17 July 2026 (S2025_003), the Swiss Federal Patent Court has sent a clear signal: Switzerland is very much in the game when it comes to cross-border patent enforcement. The Court confirmed that claims for infringement of foreign patent designations can be heard at the defendant’s Swiss domicile and established a powerful principle of parallel infringement analysis across all EPC member states. For patent holders pursuing multi-jurisdictional strategies, Switzerland must be on the map.
The case arose from interim proceedings brought by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bayer HealthCare LLC and Bayer Consumer Care AG against Sandoz Group AG, Sandoz AG and Sandoz Pharmaceuticals AG. The claimants sought a pan-European injunction against the distribution of Sandoz’ aflibercept biosimilar, relying on both the Swiss designation and multiple foreign designations of a European patent. The case thus presented the Court with a textbook scenario for testing Switzerland’s credentials as a cross-border patent litigation forum.
The Court rose to the occasion, delivering clear guidance on two issues that matter for any cross-border patent strategy:
Published: 4 August 2026
Counsel
| Published: 4 August 2026 | ||
| AUTHORS |
Barbara Abegg |
Counsel |
| Expertise |
Intellectual Property Litigation and Arbitration |
A wide-open door: jurisdiction over foreign patent designations (consideration 7)
The Court unequivocally confirmed that infringement claims relating to foreign IP rights can be brought at the defendant’s Swiss domicile. This is a critical advantage for patentees: where a potential infringer is headquartered in Switzerland, the patent holder can centralise its enforcement efforts before one court. The exclusive jurisdiction rule under Art. 22(4) of the Lugano Convention – which reserves validity and registration disputes to the courts of the state of registration – does not stand in the way where interim measures under Art. 31 of the Lugano Convention are sought.
The Court anchored its reasoning in the CJEU’s established jurisprudence, citing “Solvay/Honeywell” (C-616/10 of 12 July 2012) and, importantly, the more recent “BSH/Electrolux” (C-339/22 of 25 February 2025), in which the CJEU held that a court with jurisdiction over an infringement action retains that jurisdiction even when the defence of patent invalidity is raised. Switzerland is thus fully aligned with the latest European case law on cross-border patent jurisdiction.
One analysis, pan-European effect: the country-of-protection principle (consideration 8)
Applying the country-of-protection principle under Art. 110(1) PILA, the Court confirmed that the merits of infringement claims for territories outside Switzerland and Liechtenstein must be assessed under the respective foreign law (lex causae). In interim proceedings, however, a prima facie showing of the applicable foreign law suffices – a lower threshold that makes Switzerland an efficient forum for pan-European enforcement.
Perhaps most significantly, the Court established that where infringement is based on national designations of a European patent, Art. 69 EPC and its Interpretive Protocol govern the scope of protection uniformly across all EPC member states. The practical consequence is remarkable: in interim proceedings, a finding that infringement of the Swiss designation has (or has not) been rendered plausible effectively determines the outcome for all other asserted designations of the same European patent. One court, one analysis, pan-European implications. Only procedural matters such as urgency and grounds for interim relief remain governed by the lex fori.
Outcome: validity plausible, but no equivalent infringement
On the merits, the claimants succeeded in rendering the validity of the patent plausible. However, the Court ultimately denied infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, and the request for interim measures was dismissed. Yet the outcome on the merits should not distract from the broader message: the Court has demonstrated that Switzerland is a serious and capable forum for cross-border patent disputes. With its willingness to adjudicate foreign patent designations, its alignment with the latest CJEU jurisprudence, and the powerful principle of parallel infringement analysis across EPC states, Switzerland deserves a prominent place in any multi-jurisdictional patent litigation strategy.
Importantly, this decision is not only good news for rights holders – it is equally significant for potential infringers. The Federal Patent Court’s readiness to adjudicate cross-border patent disputes from Switzerland makes it all the more critical for defendants to proactively challenge patent validity before the same court. Switzerland offers a particularly attractive tool in this regard: expedited nullity proceedings. As confirmed by the Federal Patent Court in its announcement of 9 December 2025, a nullity action qualifies for accelerated treatment where it is directed against an intellectual property right that serves as the basis for an infringement action. For potential infringers facing cross-border enforcement from Switzerland, filing an invalidity claim – and doing so in expedited proceedings – should therefore be a key element of any defence strategy.
One court, one infringement analysis – with pan-European effect: the Swiss Federal Patent Court has confirmed its place in the cross-border patent litigation arena.
Legal Note
Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions.
Legal Note: The information contained in this Smart Insight newsletter is of general nature and does not constitute legal advice.
Let’s talk
| CONTACTS |
Thierry Calame |
Managing Partner, Co-Head of Intellectual Property, Zurich thierry.calame@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 80 00 |
|
Peter Ling |
Partner, Zurich peter.ling@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 80 00 |
|
|
Barbara Abegg |
Counsel, Zurich barbara.abegg@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 80 00 |
|
|
Sevan Antreasyan |
Partner, Head of Intellectual Property, Geneva sevan.antreasyan@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 70 00 |
|
|
Anne-Laure Laplace |
Associate, Geneva anne-laure.laplace@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 70 00 |