MedTech IP Roundup: Key UK and UPC decisions which will shape strategy in 2026

The last few years have been important ones for intellectual property in the MedTech sector. With the Unified Patent Court (UPC) now fully operational and the UK courts continuing to deliver high-quality and well-reasoned judgments, companies developing medical devices, diagnostics, and digital health solutions would be wise to consider how to approach 2026 in the face of this rapidly evolving legal landscape. Below is a roundup of five significant developments from recent years and what they mean for MedTech innovators preparing for 2026.

1. UK Supreme Court confirms that AI cannot be an inventor

At the end of December 2023, the UK Supreme Court delivered their judgment in Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents [2023] UKSC 49. It was held that an inventor must be a ‘natural person’ and rejected the argument that an AI system could be named as an inventor. The consequences of this decision have influenced strategy throughout 2025 as MedTech companies continue to increasingly integrate AI into device design and diagnostics.

Why it matters for 2026:
Patent applications for medical technologies developed using AI must clearly identify human inventors and document their inventive contribution. Failure to do so risks rejection.

2. UPC may deliver speedy wide-ranging preliminary injunctions

The UPC continues to be an effective forum for potentially obtaining preliminary injunctive relief covering up to 18 member states of the UPC within a matter of months. This is very attractive to patentees and is confirmed by the volume of PI decisions issued by the UPC in recent years. That said, preliminary injunction applications are judged on their merits and patentees should not be under any impression that obtaining preliminary relief will be a certainty.

Why it matters for 2026:

Patentees should consider the merits of unitary patents and their potential to be used to obtain broad, cost-effective protection. Conversely, those concerned about allegations of infringement should be aware of cross-border enforcement risks as it is clear that a successful UPC action can rapidly disrupt activities across Europe.

3. FRAND and SEP issues in the UPC

Connected health devices now often rely on wireless and other connectivity standards, making the licensing of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) a relevant issue in a field that historically has been less impacted by it. We are increasingly seeing court users asking the UPC to provide a FRAND-rate determination. Until recently, the UK and Germany were the dominant forums in Europe for FRAND issues. But as its jurisprudence expands, the UPC is likely to play an increasing role in shaping the approach in this area. Its full impact and direction remains to be seen.

Why it matters for 2026:

MedTech companies integrating connectivity features should anticipate dealing with SEP licensing issues and potential FRAND-related litigation in the UPC.

4. Patent Eligibility

As a previous article of mine explores, ensuring patent applications aren’t rejected on the grounds of excluded subject matter can be complicated when it comes to software-based inventions; as may be the case in the MedTech sector.

Why it matters for 2026:

It will continue to be important to think carefully about identifying the necessary ‘technical contribution’ for those wanting to secure patent protection.

5. Trade secrets 

Trade secrets are becoming increasingly important in AI, MedTech, and other data-driven sectors where patent protection may not be available to secure rights in relation to algorithms or datasets. Courts will expect companies to use both contractual and technical measures to protect secrecy. More particularly, this can involve the use of NDAs with employees and other parties having access to key information, the use of access controls (e.g. role-based permissions), encryption for sensitive data, and robust internal policies and mandatory training.

Why it matters for 2026:

MedTech companies incorporating unpatented confidential proprietary technology should consider conducting audits of their internal processes to ensure compliance with trade secrets best practices in order to maximise safeguards and protection for their technology.

Strategy for MedTech in 2026

The developments from the past few years point to several strategic priorities for MedTech companies going into 2026:

• Adopt a UPC-ready patent strategy: evaluate whether unitary patents offer better protection for your European portfolio.
• Prepare for SEP complexity: connected devices may increasingly trigger FRAND negotiations and so licensing budgets should be planned accordingly.
• Think about trade secret protection: implement technical and contractual safeguards for data-driven innovations.