CoA, August 20, 2025, order on leave of appeal, UPC_CoA_380/2025

The UPC must interpret its own substantive and procedural law in accordance with EU law and, in the rare cases where such interpretation is not possible, must of its own motion refrain from applying any provision or practice that conflicts with a provision of EU law with direct effect.

However, the UPC cannot request the CJEU to interpret the UPCA. As is clear from the case law of the CJEU, the UPCA is an international agreement concluded between Member States and thus is part of international law. EU law also stipulates that the UPC cannot request the CJEU to interpret the RoP. A request for a preliminary ruling must relate to the interpretation or validity of EU law, not to the interpretation of provisions of national law or to questions of fact raised in the main proceedings. The RoP are procedural rules which, in this respect, can be equated with national procedural law.

The successful party must apply for cost recovery within one month of service of the decision; missing this deadline extinguishes the right to apply for a cost decision (R. 151 RoP). Extensions are only possible with sufficient justification. Reinstatement may be available.

The one-month time limit does not violate EU law principles of effective remedies. It is a clear and proportionate procedural requirement, and reinstatement is possible. The deadline is clear, foreseeable, and does not disproportionately restrict access to justice (Art. 69 UPCA, Art. 47 Charter, Art. 6 ECHR).