Key takeaways
Once the Court has issued a final decision or order concluding first-instance proceedings, the public generally has an interest in accessing the pleadings and evidence
Access to the pleadings and evidence fosters a better understanding of the decision in light of the parties’ arguments and the evidence relied upon, and enables judicial scrutiny, which is essential for public confidence in the Court (with reference to UPC_CoA_404/2023, decision of April 10, 2024, mn. 47 – Ocado v. Autostore; et al.)
A law firm may qualify as the “public” within the meaning of R. 262.1(b) RoP
The review of the Court’s handling of the proceedings enhances the law firm’s ability to advise its clients before the UPC professionally and competently, and serves the interests of the Court and its users (with reference to: UPC_CoA_480/2024, decision of January 9, 2025, mn. 10 ff. – Abbott v. Powell Gilbert; et al.)
Division
LD Düsseldorf
UPC number
UPC_CFI_7/2023
Type of proceedings
Request for file inspection
Parties
Claimant: Franz Kaldewei GmbH & Co. KG
Defendant: Bette GmbH & Co. KG
Applicant: Patent- und Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Gulde & Partner
Patent(s)
EP 3 375 337 B1
Body of legislation / Rules
R. 262.1 (b) RoP
