Key takeaways
A request under Rule 262.2 RoP does not automatically grant provisional protection against disclosure of the information by the other party
Confirming its decision in the matter Strabag v Swarco and Chainzone (CoA, Order dated 1 August 2025, UPC_CoA_70/2025), the CoA emphasized that
(i) a party and its representatives may only be subject to restrictions on access to and use of information and evidence in accordance with R. 262A RoP; and
(ii) a request under Rule 262.2 RoP does not automatically grant provisional protection against disclosure of the information by the other party.
A request for confidentiality pursuant to R.262A.1 RoP must be made when the document is lodged (Rule 262A.3 RoP)
The CoA considered the Appellants’ application for confidentiality inadmissible to the extent that it concerned information and evidence already submitted in the first instance proceedings.
Division
Court of Appeal
UPC number
UPC_CoA_133/2026
UPC_CoA_134/2026
Type of proceedings
Application to protect confidential information from the other party, R. 262A RoP
Parties
Appellants (and Defendants before the Court of First Instance): The Walt Disney Company, The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V., Disney Interactive, Disney Electronic Content, Inc., Disney Platform Distribution, Inc., The Walt Disney Company Limited, Disney Enterprises, Inc., Disney Streaming Services LLC, Disney Media & Entertainment Distribution LLC (also doing business as Disney Entertainment Operations LLC), Disney Entertainment & Sports LLC (also doing business as Disney Streaming Technology LLC or Disney Technology LLC), BAMTech LLC (also doing business as BAMTech Media, Disney Streaming Services (LLC), or Disney Streaming)
Respondent (and Claimant before the Court of First Instance): InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc.
Patent(s)
EP 2 465 265
Jurisdictions
UPC
Body of legislation / Rules
Rule 262.2 RoP, Rule 262A RoP
