Create bundles formatted to CPR Part 63 requirements for the Patents Court, IPEC, and Chancery Division. Patent infringement, trade mark disputes, copyright claims, design rights, and confidential information proceedings.
Every stop on the journey explains the step, with a template, official form or hearing bundle wherever one is needed
How do I prepare an intellectual property litigation bundle?
An IP litigation bundle should follow CPR Part 63, PD 63 (Patents Court: trial bundle, reading guide and timetable at least four days before trial, PD 63 para 9.2) and, in IPEC, Annex C of the IPEC Guide. For patent cases, include the patent specification, any Product and Process Description, Particulars of Infringement or Grounds of Invalidity, prior art, technical primer, witness statements, and expert reports. For trade mark and copyright cases, include the registered rights, comparison evidence, and infringement analysis. BundleCreator formats your bundle with the correct sections and indexing for whichever IP court you are appearing in.
Each stop is a step in the journey. Large rings are hearings where you build a court bundle; small grey dots are steps you file or take, hollow dots are deadlines or events, and diamonds are forms. The key below the map explains every symbol. Click any stop to see what it involves.
Stops:Bundle hearing — a court bundle is built hereDecision hearing — the court or tribunal decides the case here; bundle requiredOptional hearing — dashed ring: only held in some casesProcess step — something you file or do, no bundleOptional step — dashed: not always applicable (e.g. only if needed or agreed)Form-filing endpoint — apply on an official court form (for example a warrant, an enforcement order or a consent order)Mediation step — mediation, a MIAM or early conciliation happens here
Reading:Blog Insight — purple book icons link to a related article (opens in a new tab)
Timing:⚠ 14 daysstatutory — miss this and lose4 weeksrequired noticetyp. 8motypical wait
Laws:This journey summarises the procedure under Patents Act 1977 (threats: ss.70–70F, substituted by the IP (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017 from 1 October 2017), Trade Marks Act 1994 (threats: ss.21–21F, substituted by the IP (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017 from 1 October 2017), Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (design right threats: ss.253–253E), Registered Designs Act 1949 (threats: ss.26–26F, substituted by the IP (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017 from 1 October 2017), Intellectual Property (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017, Civil Procedure Rules Part 63 + PD 63 (intellectual property claims; IPEC Small Claims Track: CPR 63.27; PD 63 Section V), CPR 63.17A (IPEC financial-remedy cap £500,000); CPR 63.24 (IPEC specific disclosure regime), CPR 46.20–46.22 and PD 46 para 11.1 (scale costs; SI 2022/783, claims issued on or after 1 October 2022) (IPEC costs cap £60,000 liability / £30,000 quantum, plus per-stage caps), Practice Direction 57AD (Disclosure in the Business and Property Courts — permanent regime since 1 October 2022; expressly excluded from IPEC by para 1.4(3)), Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (general; no IP-specific protocol), Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Guide (revised November 2024), Patents Court Guide (February 2025), Senior Courts Act 1981 s.37 (interim injunction power); s.72 (privilege against self-incrimination in IP cases), Senior Courts Act 1981 s.6(1) (Patents Court; substituted by SI 2026/723 art 2(3) from 1 October 2026), PD 57AC (not applicable in IPEC: para 1.3(7)), Limitation Act 1980 s.2 (six years; infringement claims are actions in tort), Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018 and Intellectual Property (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2006 reg 3 (damages). General information only — not legal advice.
⚠ THREATS WARNING — there is NO formal pre-action protocol specifically for IP claims. The general Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols applies (IPEC Guide para 4.1). Groundless threats of infringement proceedings are actionable by the recipient under the Intellectual Property (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017 (which substituted Patents Act 1977 ss.70–70F, Trade Marks Act 1994 ss.21–21F, Registered Designs Act 1949 ss.26–26F and CDPA 1988 ss.253–253E, from 1 October 2017). A threat is not actionable if it concerns only primary acts (for example making or importing a product for disposal, or applying a sign to goods), or if it is not an express threat and is contained in a permitted communication (e.g. PA 1977 ss.70A(2)–(5), 70B; TMA 1994 ss.21A, 21B). Copyright and passing off have no statutory threats action. Get specialist drafting advice on any cease-and-desist letter — particularly for patents, trade marks and registered designs — before sending.
A key strategic decision is whether to proceed in IPEC (the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court) or the Patents Court / Chancery Division (Business and Property Courts; the Chancery Division becomes the Business and Property Division on 1 October 2026, SI 2026/723). IPEC offers a streamlined, cost-capped route — financial remedies capped under CPR 63.17A at £500,000, recoverable costs capped at £60,000 for a final determination on liability and £30,000 for a determination on quantum (Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2022, SI 2022/783 (claims issued on or after 1 October 2022); CPR 46 Section VII), with per-stage caps under PD 46 para 11.1, trials of no more than 2 days, exceptionally 3 (PD 63 para 31.2; IPEC Guide 3.2); statements of case must set out concisely all facts and arguments relied on (CPR 63.20(1)). Ideal for SMEs and individuals. For IP claims valued at or below £10,000 (excluding patents, plant variety rights, registered designs, and semi-conductor topography rights) the IPEC Small Claims Track is available under CPR 63.27 if the particulars ask for it and the defendant does not object (CPR 63.27(1)(c)–(d)) — informal procedure, limited recoverable costs (CPR 27.14; PD 27A paras 7.2–7.3), no interim remedies (CPR 63.27(4)); claims filed on CE-File or at the Rolls Building on or after 3 July 2023 are transferred to Manchester for case management and trial; claims filed at other centres stay there unless transferred (IPEC Practice Note, 7 June 2023). The Patents Court and Chancery Division provide full procedure with no damages cap, complex technical evidence, and multi-day trials — appropriate for high-value or technically complex disputes.
Before the CMC, parties exchange statements of case (particulars of claim, defence, and reply). In patent cases, a defendant may serve a product and process description (PPD) instead of standard disclosure on infringement (PD 63 para 6.1); in IPEC only if ordered (para 29.1(2)). Counterclaims for invalidity are common.
Between the CMC and trial, the court directs disclosure (IPEC operates under the specific disclosure regime in CPR 63.24 — orders only on application; PD 57AD is expressly excluded from IPEC by PD 57AD para 1.4(3)). Disclosure in the Patents Court / Business and Property Courts is governed by PD 57AD (permanent regime since 1 October 2022). Expert evidence on technical matters (patent validity and infringement), market surveys (trade mark confusion), or valuation (damages) is directed at the CMC. IPEC's specimen CMC order provides for a split trial (IPEC Guide Annex B para 1); in the Patents Court / Chancery Division it is decided at the CMC.
Important: This journey map shows the typical stages of the relevant court or tribunal proceedings. It is general information, not legal advice. Every case is different. For advice about your specific situation, consult a solicitor or instruct a barrister directly.
The law, court fees and time limits can change. We work hard to keep this map accurate, but it may contain errors or become out of date, so please check anything important against the official source — for example legislation.gov.uk or GOV.UK. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Steleo Publishing Limited does not accept liability for any loss arising from reliance on this map. Each stop represents a stage where a separate bundle may be required; BundleCreator handles the formatting — it does not replace professional legal advice.
Share this journey map
Share the whole journey — title, map, key and laws — as a single image.
For IP litigation in England and Wales, your bundle should be organised following CPR Part 63 and the relevant Practice Direction. Patents Court bundles typically include pleadings and orders, patent documents, Product and Process Descriptions, prior art, a technical primer, witness evidence, expert reports, and commercial evidence. IPEC bundles follow a streamlined format with limited disclosure and costs-capped procedures. Trade mark bundles require registration details, mark comparison evidence, and goods and services analysis. Copyright bundles need the original works, alleged copies, and evidence of access and substantial copying. BundleCreator is online court bundle software that provides structured templates for each IP right type with automatic indexing, page numbering, and hyperlinked navigation.
Last reviewed: 27 September 2026 by Stevie Hayes
Intellectual Property Court Bundle UK: In Brief
An intellectual property court bundle is filed at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC, part of the Business and Property Courts) or the Patents Court for trade mark, copyright, registered design, passing off, and patent disputes. Proceedings run under CPR Part 63 and Practice Direction 63. IPEC's small claims track handles low-value disputes up to £10,000; the multi-track caps damages or profits at £500,000 (CPR 63.17A) and recoverable costs at £60,000 / £30,000 (CPR 46.21).
Key rules
CPR Part 63 (intellectual property claims), Practice Direction 63
Key statutes
Trade Marks Act 1994, Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, Patents Act 1977, Registered Designs Act 1949
IPEC small claims threshold
Claims of no more than £10,000 (CPR 63.27(1)(b)); not a hard ceiling (IPEC Guide 3.3). IPEC multi-track damages or profits cap £500,000 (CPR 63.17A)
Jurisdiction
IPEC small claims track, IPEC multi-track, Patents Court (Chancery Division; Business and Property Division from 1 October 2026 — Senior Courts Act 1981 s.6(1), SI 2026/723 art 2(3)), Court of Appeal (Civil Division) for appeals (IPEC small claims appeals go to an enterprise judge, CPR 63.19(3))
Bundle size
Trial bundles under CPR r.39.5 / PD 32 para 27; IPEC Guide Annex C; PD 63 para 9.2 (Patents Court); specimen documents and product samples often substantial; up to 1,000 pages supported, in files of no more than 300 pages each in IPEC (IPEC Guide Annex C para 12), with exhibits in a separate bundle (Annex C para 19)
Claims of no more than £10,000; issue fee depends on the amount claimed (EX50 fee 1.1: £35–£455) plus a non-money fee (£663 High Court) if an injunction is sought; limited recoverable costs (CPR 27.14)
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court imposes a £500,000 cap on damages (or account of profits) for claims determined in IPEC.
Source: Civil Procedure Rules, Part 63 and Practice Direction 63
£60,000
IPEC costs cap
Recoverable costs in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court are capped at £60,000 on liability and £30,000 on an inquiry (CPR 46.21).
Source: Civil Procedure Rules, rules 46.20 to 46.22
Built for IP Practitioners
Every feature designed for Patents Court, IPEC, and Chancery Division proceedings
Designed around CPR Part 63
Bundles formatted to follow CPR Part 63 and Practice Direction 63 requirements for IP proceedings in all specialist courts.
Product & Process Descriptions
Structured PPD sections with technical drawings and photographs, for where a Product and Process Description is served instead of standard disclosure (PD 63 para 6.1).
Prior Art Organisation
Dedicated sections for cited prior art documents with date evidence, translations, and cross-references to validity grounds.
Expert Evidence Sections
Separate tabs for claimant and defendant expert reports, joint statements, and experiments protocols with proper sequential numbering.
Claim Charts & Comparisons
Support for patent claim charts, trade mark comparison evidence, and copyright work-to-copy analysis within the bundle structure.
Technical Primer Section
Dedicated section for agreed technical background, glossaries, and diagrams as ordered by the Patents Court or IPEC.
Understanding IP Litigation Bundles
Key concepts for preparing bundles across patent, trade mark, copyright, and design disputes
IP Litigation Forums in England and Wales
Intellectual property disputes in England and Wales are heard in specialist courts within the Business and Property Courts. The correct forum depends on the complexity and value of the claim, and each has distinct procedural requirements for trial bundles.
The Patents Court hears complex patent infringement and validity disputes, often involving multi-week trials with extensive technical expert evidence. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) provides a streamlined, costs-capped alternative for lower-value IP claims across all rights. The general Chancery Division handles complex trade mark, copyright, and confidential information cases.
IPEC: Streamlined IP Disputes
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court offers a costs-capped regime with a damages cap of GBP 500,000 (CPR 63.17A) and recoverable costs capped at £60,000 (liability) and £30,000 (inquiry), with stage caps (CPR 46.21; PD 46 para 11.1). It hears all categories of IP dispute including patents, trade marks, copyright, designs, and passing off.
Damages cap: GBP 500,000 per claim
Costs cap: recoverable costs capped at £60,000 (liability) and £30,000 (inquiry), with stage caps (CPR 46.21; PD 46 para 11.1)
Small Claims Track for claims up to GBP 10,000 (not patents or registered designs)
Limited disclosure (specific disclosure only)
Expert evidence only with the court's permission
Trials of no more than 2 days, exceptionally 3 (PD 63 para 31.2; IPEC Guide 3.2)
Patents Court: Complex Patent Disputes
The Patents Court, part of the Chancery Division (the Business and Property Division from 1 October 2026, SI 2026/723 art 2(3)), handles high-value and technically complex patent litigation. Proceedings follow CPR Part 63 and Practice Direction 63, with specialist requirements including Product and Process Descriptions, experiments notices, and technical primers.
Product and Process Descriptions may be served instead of standard disclosure (PD 63 para 6.1)
Experiments notice and protocol for experimental evidence
Technical primers encouraged (Patents Court Guide para 14.6)
Expert reports exchanged as directed at the CMC
Claim construction following Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 48
Trials listed in windows of 2–5, 5–10 and over 10 days (Patents Court Guide Annex D)
Trade Marks, Copyright, and Design Rights
Trade mark infringement claims under the Trade Marks Act 1994 require careful analysis of mark similarity, goods and services comparison, and likelihood of confusion. Copyright disputes under the CDPA 1988 involve questions of subsistence, ownership, and whether a substantial part has been copied. Design right claims engage both registered designs (Registered Designs Act 1949) and unregistered design right (CDPA 1988, Part III).
Each right type demands specific evidence in the trial bundle: mark comparison charts for trade marks, the copyright works and alleged copies for copyright, and informed user analysis for registered designs.
IP Dispute Templates
Choose the template that matches your IP right type and forum
Patent Infringement (Patents Court)
Full trial bundle with PPD, claim charts, prior art, and expert reports for Patents Act 1977 s.60 claims.
Patent Infringement (IPEC)
Streamlined patent bundle within IPEC costs limits. Designed for IPEC's permission-based evidence, with a concise PPD where ordered.
Trade Mark Infringement
Sections 10(1)-(3) TMA 1994 claims with mark comparison, goods and services analysis, and reputation evidence.
Copyright Infringement
CDPA 1988 claims with original work, alleged copies, access evidence, and substantial part analysis sections.
Interim Injunction (IP)
American Cyanamid application bundle with draft order, evidence on whether damages would be an adequate remedy, and balance of convenience.
Confidential Information & Trade Secrets
Springboard injunction and trade secrets claims under the Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018 with Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41 analysis.
IP litigation — technical and benefits from expert eyes
IPEC is more accessible than the Patents Court, but IP turns on technical evidence. BC presents your case; the strategy stays with your legal representative.
Common questions about preparing bundles for intellectual property proceedings
BundleCreator's Intellectual Property template produces an IPEC-aligned bundle: pleadings (claim form, particulars of claim, defence, reply), the Case Management Conference order, witness statements, expert evidence (CPR Part 35), trial exhibits, and authorities. Output is paginated continuously, OCR'd, hyperlinked-index, and bookmarked — for sending to the IPEC clerk as an e-bundle for remote hearings, or lodging in hard copy for in-person hearings (IPEC Guide 5.1, 5.5; hearing bundles are not filed on CE-File). The IPEC small claims track (claims of no more than £10,000) and multi-track (damages or profits capped at £500,000) are both supported.
Patent infringement trials need: the patent specification with claims, the alleged infringing product/process specification, prior art bundle (often substantial), expert reports on infringement (claim construction, person skilled in the art) and validity (novelty, inventive step), Notice of Experiments where relevant, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template structures these for the Patents Court (High Court) or IPEC with pagination, OCR, hyperlinked index from claim chart entries to evidence, and section bookmarks per claim.
A claim chart maps each patent claim element to the alleged infringing feature (or, in validity, to the prior art). BundleCreator's IP template includes a claim chart slot at the front of the bundle with hyperlinks from each claim element to the supporting evidence — expert report paragraphs, product specifications, prior art passages. IPEC Guide para 4.5(c) recommends a claim chart breaking each claim into integers.
Passing off requires evidence of goodwill (customers in the UK who associate the claimant's business with the mark or get-up; mere reputation is not enough: Starbucks (HK) Ltd v British Sky Broadcasting Group plc [2015] UKSC 31 at [52]), misrepresentation by the defendant, and damage. BundleCreator's IP template orders the bundle: pleadings, witness statements on goodwill (sales figures, marketing spend, customer perceptions), survey evidence only with the court's permission (Marks and Spencer plc v Interflora Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 1501), defendant's product/branding, expert evidence only on a market unfamiliar to the judge (esure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line Insurance plc [2008] EWCA Civ 842 at [62]), and authorities. Paginated, OCR'd, hyperlinked-index for IPEC or the Chancery Division.
UK registered design rights (Registered Designs Act 1949) and unregistered design rights (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 Part III) infringement actions in the IPEC need: the registered design certificate or design documents, the alleged infringing article, side-by-side comparison evidence, witness statements on the design corpus and informed user, any permitted expert evidence on the design corpus and design freedom, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template orders these for IPEC's streamlined procedure.
UKIPO opposition hearings under the Trade Marks Act 1994 typically need: the trade mark application (Form TM3), the notice of opposition (Form TM7) and counter-statement (Form TM8), the parties' statements of grounds, witness statements with exhibits, evidence on relative grounds (similarity of marks, similarity of goods/services, average consumer), evidence on absolute grounds where pleaded, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template produces paginated, bookmarked PDFs for UKIPO tribunal hearings.
BundleCreator runs on Google Cloud's London region (europe-west2) — primary storage, backups, and processing all in the UK. AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit. Confidential information, trade secrets, and breach-of-confidence evidence stay within UK borders, removing UK GDPR Article 44 transfer concerns. Particularly relevant for confidentiality club arrangements where designated legal representatives and experts review evidence under restricted-access undertakings.
Breach-of-confidence trials (for example, misuse of trade secrets, breach of NDAs, employee-departure disputes) typically have a confidentiality club arrangement under which only designated legal representatives and experts see the confidential material. BundleCreator's IP template supports a redacted main bundle plus a separate confidentiality club bundle, both paginated, OCR'd, and bookmarked.
BundleCreator's Essential tier is £24.99 a month for up to 15 bundles in total — works for sole IP solicitors running IPEC small-claims and multi-track work. The Pro tier (£49.99 a month) allows up to 40 bundles in total on Pro for high-street IP practices. Designed to produce IPEC, Patents Court, and UKIPO opposition bundles with continuous pagination, OCR, hyperlinked index, and section bookmarks. No per-seat minimums.
Works on any website. No account required. Includes “Powered by BundleCreator” branding.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best bundle template for the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC)?
BundleCreator's Intellectual Property template produces an IPEC-aligned bundle: pleadings (claim form, particulars of claim, defence, reply), the Case Management Conference order, witness statements, expert evidence (CPR Part 35), trial exhibits, and authorities. Output is paginated continuously, OCR'd, hyperlinked-index, and bookmarked — for sending to the IPEC clerk as an e-bundle for remote hearings, or lodging in hard copy for in-person hearings (IPEC Guide 5.1, 5.5; hearing bundles are not filed on CE-File). The IPEC small claims track (claims of no more than £10,000) and multi-track (damages or profits capped at £500,000) are both supported.
How do I prepare a patent infringement trial bundle with prior art?
Patent infringement trials need: the patent specification with claims, the alleged infringing product/process specification, prior art bundle (often substantial), expert reports on infringement (claim construction, person skilled in the art) and validity (novelty, inventive step), Notice of Experiments where relevant, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template structures these for the Patents Court (High Court) or IPEC with pagination, OCR, hyperlinked index from claim chart entries to evidence, and section bookmarks per claim.
How do I prepare a claim chart bundle template for the Patents Court?
A claim chart maps each patent claim element to the alleged infringing feature (or, in validity, to the prior art). BundleCreator's IP template includes a claim chart slot at the front of the bundle with hyperlinks from each claim element to the supporting evidence — expert report paragraphs, product specifications, prior art passages. IPEC Guide para 4.5(c) recommends a claim chart breaking each claim into integers.
How do I prepare a passing off claim bundle with goodwill evidence?
Passing off requires evidence of goodwill (customers in the UK who associate the claimant's business with the mark or get-up; mere reputation is not enough: Starbucks (HK) Ltd v British Sky Broadcasting Group plc [2015] UKSC 31 at [52]), misrepresentation by the defendant, and damage. BundleCreator's IP template orders the bundle: pleadings, witness statements on goodwill (sales figures, marketing spend, customer perceptions), survey evidence only with the court's permission (Marks and Spencer plc v Interflora Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 1501), defendant's product/branding, expert evidence only on a market unfamiliar to the judge (esure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line Insurance plc [2008] EWCA Civ 842 at [62]), and authorities. Paginated, OCR'd, hyperlinked-index for IPEC or the Chancery Division.
How do I prepare a design rights infringement IPEC bundle?
UK registered design rights (Registered Designs Act 1949) and unregistered design rights (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 Part III) infringement actions in the IPEC need: the registered design certificate or design documents, the alleged infringing article, side-by-side comparison evidence, witness statements on the design corpus and informed user, any permitted expert evidence on the design corpus and design freedom, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template orders these for IPEC's streamlined procedure.
How do I prepare a trade mark opposition bundle for UKIPO hearing?
UKIPO opposition hearings under the Trade Marks Act 1994 typically need: the trade mark application (Form TM3), the notice of opposition (Form TM7) and counter-statement (Form TM8), the parties' statements of grounds, witness statements with exhibits, evidence on relative grounds (similarity of marks, similarity of goods/services, average consumer), evidence on absolute grounds where pleaded, and authorities. BundleCreator's IP template produces paginated, bookmarked PDFs for UKIPO tribunal hearings.
Is there a UK-hosted IP bundling tool for confidential information and trade secrets?
BundleCreator runs on Google Cloud's London region (europe-west2) — primary storage, backups, and processing all in the UK. AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit. Confidential information, trade secrets, and breach-of-confidence evidence stay within UK borders, removing UK GDPR Article 44 transfer concerns. Particularly relevant for confidentiality club arrangements where designated legal representatives and experts review evidence under restricted-access undertakings.
How do I prepare a confidential information / breach-of-confidence trial bundle?
Breach-of-confidence trials (for example, misuse of trade secrets, breach of NDAs, employee-departure disputes) typically have a confidentiality club arrangement under which only designated legal representatives and experts see the confidential material. BundleCreator's IP template supports a redacted main bundle plus a separate confidentiality club bundle, both paginated, OCR'd, and bookmarked.
Is there a cheap bundle tool for sole IP solicitors?
BundleCreator's Essential tier is £24.99 a month for up to 15 bundles in total — works for sole IP solicitors running IPEC small-claims and multi-track work. The Pro tier (£49.99 a month) allows up to 40 bundles in total on Pro for high-street IP practices. Designed to produce IPEC, Patents Court, and UKIPO opposition bundles with continuous pagination, OCR, hyperlinked index, and section bookmarks. No per-seat minimums.
