The UPC Court of Appeal has confirmed that Gucci did not infringe Agfa’s patent for a technique used in printing on leather, and has partially revoked Agfa’s patent.
Agfa’s patent, which describes how to print decorative patterns onto leather using a special base layer and UV-reactive inks, was challenged by Gucci in 2023. The company accused nine Gucci subsidiaries of violating the patent through items in the Pikarar Collection.
Background of the Case
The initial ruling by the Hamburg court in April 2025 rejected both Agfa’s infringement claims and Gucci’s request to invalidate the patent.
The court clarified that a manufacturing method of a publicly used product is made available to the public under Art. 54(2) EPC if the skilled person could establish the method without undue burden by analysing the product’s composition.
Partial Survival and Claim Construction
The court upheld claim 5 in combination with claim 1. It also upheld claim 9, concerning heat pressing of the printed leather, and dependent claims 6, 7 and 8 insofar as they depend on claim 5. The judges determined that prior Japanese and US patents cited by Gucci did not preempt these specific protections.
Related Post: French court upholds Align patent against Angelalign
Significantly, the Court of Appeal disagreed with the Hamburg division’s interpretation of the term “achromatic colour”, holding that an achromatic colour within the meaning of the patent is not restricted to a theoretically perfect achromatic colour. The judges’ panel noted that in the context of luxury leather goods, warmer whites are commonly used.
Infringement and Costs
On infringement, the court found that Agfa failed to prove Gucci’s Pikarar Collection used the specific chemical components (polyfunctional monomers or oligomers) required by claim 5. Additionally, the judges dismissed Agfa’s arguments about leather flexibility and a shift in legal burden under the Unified Patent Court Agreement (Art. 55 UPCA).
The appeal panel ordered Agfa to bear the full costs of both the infringement action and the counterclaims for revocation at both instances, setting the total value of the appeal proceedings at €2.5 million. Agfa was represented by a team from Vossius Brinkhof UPC Litigators, while Gucci was represented by a Hogan Lovells Cadwalader team.
Agfa’s legal team included Vossius partners Stefan Fickert and Elard Schenck zu Schweinsberg, alongside patent attorney Ananda Landwehr, with in-house counsel Hans Louis Strijckers overseeing the case. Gucci retained Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, led by Benjamin Schröer (infringement) and Andreas Schmid (validity).
The Court of Appeal’s decision was made under court president Klaus Grabinski, who led the appeal panel that revoked large parts of Agfa’s EP 3 388 490 patent for the territories of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden. The appeal panel also dismissed Agfa’s infringement appeal, confirming that Gucci’s Pikarar Collection does not infringe the remaining claims, as stated in case ID: UPC_CoA_582/2025. Furthermore, the Hamburg division had originally apportioned 60% of the costs to Gucci, but the appeal panel ordered Agfa to bear the full costs of both the infringement action and the counterclaims for revocation at both instances.
