Since 1 January 2026, small and micro enterprises pay 50% of the court fees at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), and they can ask the court to lower the cap on costs they would have to reimburse if they lose. What SME status does not do is shield them from an order to provide security for costs: on 1 June 2026, in La Siddhi v Athena, the UPC Court of Appeal upheld a EUR 75,000 security against a micro-enterprise that had brought a revocation action. This guide sets out UPC SME costs, from fees to recoverable costs and security, for smaller companies, including those based outside the EU, that plan to sue, attack a patent or negotiate a licence.
Key takeaways
- Court fees rose on 1 January 2026; an infringement action now carries a fixed fee of EUR 14,600 and a revocation action EUR 26,500.
- Only small and micro enterprises get the 50% fee reduction under Rule 370.8 RoP; medium-sized companies pay the full fee.
- The losing party can be ordered to pay the winner’s representation costs up to a ceiling set by the value of the case, for example EUR 112,000 for a case worth up to EUR 1 million.
- SME status does not exempt a claimant from security for costs (La Siddhi v Athena, UPC_CoA_48/2026).
- Financial evidence decides security applications: a claimant that stays silent about its finances will usually lose that argument.
How much are UPC court fees after the 2026 increase?
The UPC’s Administrative Committee amended the Table of Court Fees on 4 November 2025, with effect from 1 January 2026. The decision raised fixed fees and, to soften the impact on smaller users, increased the SME reduction from 40% to 50%. Selected fees at first instance:
| Action | Regular fee | Small or micro enterprise (50%) |
|---|---|---|
| Infringement action (fixed fee) | EUR 14,600 | EUR 7,300 |
| Plus value-based fee, value up to EUR 500,000 | EUR 0 | EUR 0 |
| Plus value-based fee, value up to EUR 1 million | EUR 5,300 | EUR 2,650 |
| Plus value-based fee, value up to EUR 5 million | EUR 42,400 | EUR 21,200 |
| Revocation action | EUR 26,500 | EUR 13,250 |
| Counterclaim for revocation | Same as the infringement action, capped at EUR 26,500 | 50% of that amount |
| Application for provisional measures | EUR 14,600 | EUR 7,300 |
| Application to preserve evidence | EUR 5,000 | EUR 2,500 |
The reform also narrowed refunds: under the amended Rule 370.9, a party gets 50% back if the action is withdrawn before the written procedure closes, or 65% if the case is settled or decided by arbitral award at the Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre before the interim procedure ends.
Who qualifies for the SME fee reduction?
Rule 370.8 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP) applies to small enterprises and micro-enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361. According to the European Commission:
- A micro-enterprise has fewer than 10 staff and turnover or balance sheet total of no more than EUR 2 million.
- A small enterprise has fewer than 50 staff and turnover or balance sheet total of no more than EUR 10 million.
- A company that belongs to a larger group may have to include group figures.
The reduction is claimed by an affirmation lodged with the statement of claim, counterclaim or application. The court can ask for financial documents at any time. If the affirmation turns out to be wrong, the party pays the remaining fee plus an additional 50% of the regular fee, and failure to pay can lead to a decision by default.
What could a losing SME have to pay the other side?
Under Article 69 UPCA, the unsuccessful party generally bears the winner’s reasonable and proportionate legal costs, up to a ceiling fixed by the Administrative Committee decision of 24 April 2023. The ceiling applies per instance, however many parties or patents are involved.
| Value of the proceeding | Ceiling for recoverable costs |
|---|---|
| Up to EUR 250,000 | EUR 38,000 |
| Up to EUR 500,000 | EUR 56,000 |
| Up to EUR 1 million | EUR 112,000 |
| Up to EUR 2 million | EUR 200,000 |
| Up to EUR 4 million | EUR 400,000 |
| Up to EUR 8 million | EUR 600,000 |
| More than EUR 50 million | EUR 2 million |
Article 2(2) of that decision lets a party, in particular an SME, ask the court to lower the ceiling if the costs it might have to pay would threaten its economic existence. The request must be made as early as possible, with all reasonably available evidence, and the court weighs turnover, the type of business of both parties and the effect on the other side.
Security for costs after La Siddhi v Athena
Article 69(4) UPCA and Rule 158 RoP allow the court, at the defendant’s request, to order the claimant to provide security for the costs it may have to pay. The Court of Appeal’s order of 1 June 2026 shows how this works for SMEs:
- La Siddhi Consultancy, a UK company, filed a revocation action against Athena Pharmaceutiques and Substipharm’s unitary patent EP 3 592 333 at the Milan central division.
- The defendants asked for security, relying on La Siddhi’s published accounts. La Siddhi answered only that the request was unfounded and pointed to its SME declaration.
- Milan ordered EUR 75,000, by deposit or a bank guarantee from an EU-licensed bank, within six weeks.
- The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Rule 158 contains no SME exception, unlike Rule 370.8, and that was a deliberate choice. Once the defendant makes a credible case, the claimant must answer with its own financial evidence.
- On the amount, the court starts from the recoverable-costs ceiling (EUR 112,000 here) and adjusts it to the case; EUR 75,000, around 60%, was reasonable. SME status can be one factor, but is not a reason to reduce the amount on its own.
The claimant also argued that being in the UK, outside the Brussels and Lugano enforcement regimes, was no reason for security. The court found that beside the point: the order rested on La Siddhi’s finances, not on enforcement abroad. Its new SME evidence, filed only on appeal, was disregarded.
What this means for your business
For a smaller company, UPC SME costs are a budgeting exercise to finish before filing, not after. In practice:
- Check whether you are a small or micro enterprise on group figures; medium-sized companies get no fee reduction.
- Value the case early. The value drives both the value-based fee and the ceiling of costs you may have to pay.
- If you are the claimant, budget for security up to the relevant ceiling and prepare current accounts, cash position and, where available, guarantees.
- If an adverse costs award would threaten the company, apply to lower the ceiling at the start, with evidence.
- Use the cost exposure in licence negotiations; settlement at the PMAC can recover 65% of court fees.
Our patent team for UPC actions and revocation strategy can put these figures into a single budget before you commit.
Where SMEs get UPC costs wrong
- Treating the SME declaration as a shield. It reduces fees; it says nothing about your ability to pay costs.
- Staying silent on finances. In La Siddhi, the claimant’s failure to file its own figures at first instance decided the point.
- Filing evidence too late. New material on appeal may simply be ignored.
- Claiming SME status loosely. A wrong affirmation costs the remaining fee plus a 50% surcharge.
- Budgeting only for court fees. Security and the other side’s costs can exceed the fee several times over.
Frequently asked questions
How much does a UPC infringement action cost an SME in court fees?
Since 1 January 2026 the fixed fee is EUR 14,600, plus a value-based fee for cases worth more than EUR 500,000, such as EUR 5,300 up to EUR 1 million. Small and micro enterprises pay 50% of both, so EUR 7,300 and EUR 2,650 in that example. Representation, experts and translations are separate.
Does SME status protect against security for costs at the UPC?
No. In La Siddhi v Athena, the Court of Appeal held on 1 June 2026 that SME status or an SME declaration is not in itself enough to avoid security under Rule 158 RoP. It may be considered when setting the amount, but the claimant must show with evidence that it can meet a costs order.
Can an SME ask the UPC to lower the costs it might have to reimburse?
Yes. Under Article 2(2) of the Administrative Committee decision of 24 April 2023, a party, especially an SME, may ask the court to lower the ceiling of recoverable costs if paying them would threaten its economic existence. The request should be made early, ideally with the statement of claim or defence, and supported by evidence.
Can IP Global Guard prepare a UPC cost budget for my company?
Yes. We assess SME eligibility, value the case, estimate fees, recoverable costs and possible security, and coordinate the action with European patent attorneys and UPC representatives. Companies from Latin America and Africa get the European litigation budget and strategy through a single point of contact.
How IP Global Guard can help you budget a UPC case
The UPC can be good value for a smaller company, provided the full cost exposure is known before the first filing. IP Global Guard, the IP services line of META Channel Corporation Limited, coordinates patent enforcement, revocation and licensing across more than 25 jurisdictions in Europe, Latin America and Africa, working with European patent attorneys and UPC representatives and alongside our IP disputes and licensing team.
Tell us which patent is at stake, your role as claimant or defendant and your latest annual figures. We will give you a clear view of fees, costs exposure and security before you decide. Ask our team for a UPC cost review.
This article is general information, not legal advice, and reflects the position at its publication date.
Sources
- UPC Court of Appeal, order of 1 June 2026, UPC_CoA_48/2026, La Siddhi v Athena and Substipharm (text of the order)
- Mondaq / Bardehle Pagenberg, CoA June 1, 2026 order on procedural security (8 June 2026)
- UPC, Table of Court Fees, as amended on 4 November 2025 (in force 1 January 2026)
- UPC Administrative Committee, decision D-AC/08/02072025 rev.1 on amended court fees (4 November 2025)
- UPC, Rules of Procedure, consolidated version in force from 1 January 2026
- UPC Administrative Committee, decision on the scale of recoverable cost ceilings (24 April 2023)
- European Commission, SME definition (Recommendation 2003/361)
