LD Düsseldorf, July 24, 2026, Order on Public Access to the Register, UPC_CFI_226/2024

A member of the public must submit a reasoned request explaining the purpose of the requested access and specify the documents and evidence sought as precisely as possible (Sec. 15). In this regard it is sufficient that applicant wants to better undestand why claimant considers its patent to be essential for a standard (Sec. 17). However, general requests for “access to the Register” or unspecified exhibits are inadmissible, as the Court cannot be expected to sight the evidence and select relevant documents on behalf of the applicant. Instead, the applicant must specify as precisely as possible which pleadings and evidence the request for access relates to (Sec. 19).

Upon conclusion of first-instance proceedings, public interest generally outweighs confidentiality concerns under Art. 45 UPCA (Sec. 23 with further references).

This applies irrespective of whether an appeal is pending, whether the order concerns provisional measures (Rule 206 RoP), or whether the same information or evidence also relates to parallel proceedings on the same patent or patent family (Sec. 24 with reference to UPC CoA Abbott v. Powell Gilbert).

A member of the public may have specific interests in the briefs and evidence of specific proceedings, especially as a competitor or licensee who is directly concerned by the validity of the patent or who is alleged to infringe the same patent with an identical or similar product (Sec. 25 with further references).

One party’s significant time and financial expenditure to analyze the standard-essentiality of a patent represents ordinary litigation preparation and does not suffice to qualify the resulting legal or technical arguments as confidential under Rule 262.2 RoP (Sec. 30).