When the other side files revocation first: what to do first
When a revocation action lands before you have filed anything, the priority is procedural, not substantive. Identify the forum, confirm the deadline for your defence, and secure the patent file and prosecution history before drafting a single argument on validity. Missing the response window is fatal, regardless of how strong the patent looks on the merits.
The forum you are now in
For patents within the unitary system, competence for revocation actions sits with the panel constituted under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court. The scope of the right under attack is defined by Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012, and translation questions that sometimes surface as a side argument in revocation proceedings follow Council Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012.
Classical European patents that were opted out of this system remain outside that forum and follow national procedure instead. This registry entry does not yet hold that national layer, so this page does not describe it. Confirming which category your patent falls into is the first fact you need, before anything else.
| Type of patent under attack | Forum for the revocation action | Governing act |
|---|---|---|
| Unitary patent | Panel constituted under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court | Agreement on a Unified Patent Court |
| Classical European patent, opted in | Same forum, during the transitional period | Agreement on a Unified Patent Court |
| Classical European patent, opted out | National patent office or court | Not covered by this registry entry |
What changes once the action is filed
A revocation action filed against you is not a warning shot. It starts a clock, and the clock runs from service, not from the moment you notice the filing. A parallel dispute over who owns the invention follows a different logic entirely; see What to do first in this situation step by step, since the evidence you gather now can serve both fronts if ownership is also contested.
The burden in a revocation action sits mostly with the party attacking the patent, but that does not mean you can stay passive. Silence, or a late filing, can produce the same result as a weak defence: the patent falls, or claims are narrowed, by default rather than by argument.
What to do first, in order
- Instruct patent counsel to confirm the exact date of service and the forum in which the action was filed.
- Have your case manager calendar the response deadline the same day, before any substantive review begins.
- Ask your patent attorney to pull the complete prosecution file, including every prior-art reference cited during examination.
- Have counsel assess whether claim amendment is available as a defence, and on what timetable.
- Decide, with your litigation lead, whether to raise a counterclaim for infringement in the same proceeding.
- Preserve internal records of the invention's development, in case the attack turns on added subject matter or on novelty.
If you want context on how matters like this are staffed before instructing us, How the team hires in practice is a short explanation of our approach.
Who decides, and on what evidence
Under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, a panel decides revocation actions on the basis of the prosecution file, the prior art cited by the party attacking the patent, and expert evidence submitted by both sides. The panel does not decide on commercial merit or on how the patent has been used; it decides on validity as a legal question, tested against the record.
For patents outside the unitary system, the decision sits with the national office or court under the applicable national procedure. That layer is not yet part of this registry, so this page cannot set out its detail without risking a reference that has not been checked.
Three common variations
If the revocation action arrives as a standalone filing, with no infringement claim attached, treat it as a direct challenge and respond within the forum's own timetable. If it arrives as a counterclaim inside an infringement action you started, the two questions will usually be heard together, and your infringement strategy needs to account for the validity attack from day one. If the attack rests on a translation point rather than on prior art, the argument will often trace back to Council Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012, and it tends to resolve faster than a substantive novelty challenge.
A different timing problem, outside patents entirely, shows up when ownership of a digital asset is challenged after the fact: When the creator disputes the mint explained in our tokenised-rights note follows a similar first-week logic, even though the asset class differs completely.
What this page does not cover
This page does not assess whether your patent will survive the specific attack; that depends on facts this registry does not hold. It does not cover the national procedure for patents opted out of the unitary system, and it does not estimate how long the full proceeding will run, since that depends on the forum's caseload at the time of filing.
When the opposing party in a related dispute is unfamiliar to you, our registry note Counterparty in Ireland and the deadline sets out what can be established from public filings before you commit further spend on the case itself.
Related situations
A related scenario, When prior art surfaces after grant: what to do, shares much of this early-stage logic, since both start with the same instinct to secure the file before arguing the merits.
Verified
Checked on 3 June 2025 against the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012, and Council Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012. Where national procedure would be the relevant authority, this page states that fact rather than describing a procedure the registry does not yet hold.
Frequently asked questions
What is the first step when the other side files revocation first?
Confirm the date of service and the forum, then calendar the response deadline before doing any substantive work on the merits.
Which deadline is already running?
The response deadline set by the forum runs from the date of service, not from the date you become aware of the filing. Confirming that date is the first task, not the last.
Who decides, and on what evidence?
For patents within the unitary system, a panel constituted under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court decides, based on the prosecution file, cited prior art, and expert evidence from both sides.