Key takeaways
Appellate review of cost decisions is limited to a marginal review (Art. 69 UPCA, R. 221 RoP)
The Court of Appeal only intervenes if awarded costs are beyond “reasonable and proportionate” or deviate from principles inherent in Art. 69 (1) UPCA and R. 150 et seqq. The Court of Appeal recognizes that the first-instance judge-rapporteur is best placed to decide on costs having managed the case step by step throughout the various stages of the proceedings.
Recoverable costs must be proportionate and within the applicable ceiling (Art. 69 UPCA, R. 152.2, R. 370.6 RoP)
Proportionality is checked against the cost ceiling, determined by the action’s value. Within that ceiling, the court qualitatively assesses if the costs for the successful party’s activities were reasonable.
Pending rehearing applications are irrelevant for an appeal against a cost decision
The applicant’s argument that pending rehearing applications in related proceedings should be considered was dismissed by the Court as “not relevant in the present case” for the cost appeal.
Division
Court of Appeal
UPC number
UPC-COA-0000911/2025 (Appeal Number)
UPC_CFI_724/2025, ACT_34440/2025 (Decision under appeal)
Type of proceedings
Application for leave to appeal a cost decision
Parties
Applicant: Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy
Respondent: Microsoft Corporation
Patent(s)
EP 2 671 173
Body of legislation / Rules
Art. 69 UPCA
R. 150 RoP
R. 151 RoP
R. 152 RoP
R. 156 RoP
R. 221 RoP
R. 223 RoP
R. 370.6 RoP
