Skip to content 
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (“IPEC”) plays a central role within the UK intellectual property litigation landscape. Designed to provide a more streamlined and cost-effective forum for resolving intellectual property disputes, IPEC has become particularly important for small and medium-sized enterprises (“SMEs”), individual rights holders and businesses seeking proportionate enforcement of their intellectual property rights.
Operating as part of the Business and Property Courts of the High Court of Justice, IPEC handles a broad range of intellectual property matters while applying specialist procedural rules intended to reduce complexity, control costs and improve access to justice.
What is the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court?
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court is a specialist court within the Chancery Division that deals exclusively with intellectual property disputes.
Originally established as the Patents County Court, the court was reformed and renamed in 2013 to expand its accessibility and improve efficiency for lower-value and less complex IP disputes.
The court is designed to:
- provide quicker and more affordable litigation;
- simplify procedural requirements;
- cap recoverable costs;
- and encourage active case management.
IPEC is particularly suited to businesses that may otherwise be unable to pursue or defend intellectual property claims in the High Court due to cost exposure.
Jurisdiction of IPEC
IPEC hears a wide range of intellectual property disputes, including matters relating to:
- trade marks;
- copyright;
- patents;
- registered and unregistered designs;
- passing off;
- database rights;
- confidential information;
- and related contractual disputes involving IP rights.
The court can hear both infringement and validity disputes.
However, IPEC is generally intended for cases of limited complexity and financial value.
The Two Main Tracks of IPEC
IPEC operates through two principal procedural tracks:
- the Multi-Track;
- the Small Claims Track.
Each serves different types of disputes.
The IPEC Multi-Track
The Multi-Track handles more substantial IP disputes but still operates under significant procedural controls.
Financial Caps
The Multi-Track imposes:
- a damages cap of £500,000; and
- a recoverable costs cap of £60,000 for the liability phase, with additional capped amounts for inquiries as to damages or accounts of profits.
These cost controls are one of the defining features of IPEC litigation.
The capped costs regime substantially reduces litigation risk compared with standard High Court proceedings, where adverse costs exposure can be significantly higher.
The IPEC Small Claims Track
The Small Claims Track is designed for lower-value and less complex disputes.
It commonly handles:
- small-scale copyright disputes;
- online image infringement claims;
- small business trade mark disputes;
- and limited passing off matters.
Generally, claims on the Small Claims Track involve damages below £10,000.
Legal costs recovery is extremely limited, making the process more accessible for litigants in person and smaller businesses.
Hearings are typically informal and shorter than Multi-Track proceedings.
The Civil Procedure Rules Governing IPEC
IPEC proceedings are governed by:
- the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”);
- Part 63 CPR;
- and the accompanying Practice Direction 63.
Specific procedural provisions are tailored to intellectual property litigation and the streamlined nature of the court.
Active Case Management
One of the defining features of IPEC is judicial case management.
The court exercises robust control over:
- disclosure;
- witness evidence;
- expert evidence;
- and trial length.
The overriding objective is to ensure that cases are dealt with proportionately and efficiently.
Judges actively seek to limit unnecessary procedural steps and prevent disproportionate litigation costs.
Statements of Case
Claims in IPEC begin through standard CPR procedures by issuing:
- a Claim Form;
- and Particulars of Claim.
The pleadings must clearly identify:
- the intellectual property rights relied upon;
- the alleged infringing acts;
- the relief sought;
- and the factual basis of the claim.
Defendants then serve:
- a Defence;
- and, where appropriate, a Counterclaim challenging validity.
Given the streamlined nature of the court, concise and focused pleadings are strongly encouraged.
The Case Management Conference (“CMC”)
Following service of statements of case, the court will usually list a Case Management Conference.
The CMC is central to IPEC procedure.
At this stage, the court will determine:
- the issues in dispute;
- whether expert evidence is required;
- the scope of disclosure;
- witness evidence limits;
- and the timetable to trial.
The court frequently limits:
- the number of witnesses;
- the length of witness statements;
- and the scope of documentary disclosure.
Disclosure in IPEC
Disclosure obligations in IPEC are significantly narrower than standard High Court litigation.
The court often orders:
- issue-based disclosure;
- specific disclosure;
- or no disclosure at all beyond known adverse documents.
The aim is to minimise costs and prevent disclosure exercises from becoming disproportionate.
This is particularly important in IP disputes involving extensive technical or commercial documentation.
Evidence and Witness Statements
Witness statements must generally:
- be concise;
- address only relevant factual matters;
- and avoid unnecessary argument.
Expert evidence is tightly controlled and only permitted where necessary.
The court will usually require:
- clearly defined issues for experts;
- joint expert discussions;
- and proportionate reporting.
Trials in IPEC
Trials in IPEC are intentionally shorter than traditional High Court proceedings.
Most trials last:
- between one and three days;
- although more complex matters may last longer.
The court generally imposes:
- strict trial timetables;
- reading limits;
- and page limits for bundles and skeleton arguments.
This contributes significantly to cost control and procedural efficiency.
Remedies Available in IPEC
Despite its streamlined procedure, IPEC retains the power to grant substantial remedies, including:
- injunctions;
- damages;
- accounts of profits;
- delivery up and destruction orders;
- declarations;
- and costs awards within the capped regime.
Interim injunctions may also be available where appropriate.
Transfer Between IPEC and the High Court
Cases may be transferred:
- from IPEC to the High Court;
- or vice versa.
Transfer applications commonly arise where:
- complexity increases;
- damages exceed IPEC limits;
- substantial disclosure becomes necessary;
- or technical issues become unsuitable for streamlined management.
The court will consider:
- proportionality;
- procedural fairness;
- and the efficient administration of justice.
Appeals from IPEC
Appeals from IPEC are generally heard by:
- the High Court;
- or the Court of Appeal depending on the level of judge and nature of the decision.
Permission to appeal is usually required.
Advantages of IPEC
IPEC offers several significant advantages for litigants:
- capped costs exposure;
- streamlined procedure;
- quicker resolution of disputes;
- specialist IP judges;
- and greater accessibility for SMEs.
For many businesses, IPEC provides a commercially realistic enforcement forum that balances procedural fairness with proportionality.
Criticisms and Limitations
Despite its benefits, IPEC is not suitable for every dispute.
Potential limitations include:
- damages caps;
- restrictions on extensive disclosure;
- limited ability to pursue highly complex technical cases;
- and constraints on lengthy expert evidence.
Larger or strategically critical disputes may still require High Court proceedings.
Conclusion
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court has become one of the most important forums for intellectual property litigation in the UK. By combining specialist judicial expertise with streamlined procedural rules and controlled costs, IPEC provides an effective and accessible mechanism for resolving IP disputes proportionately.
Its procedures reflect a deliberate shift toward efficient and commercially practical litigation, particularly for SMEs and rights holders seeking meaningful enforcement without the substantial financial risks traditionally associated with High Court proceedings.
As intellectual property disputes continue to grow in volume and complexity, IPEC remains central to the UK’s broader strategy of promoting innovation, protecting rights holders and ensuring access to justice within the intellectual property sector.
