Author: Anita Peter
-
LD Munich, November 21, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_550/2024
The Rules of Procedure of the UPC do not contain a principle according to which evidence for factual allegations arising from the action may no longer be submitted by the party to the action after the action has been filed.: According to Rule 172.2 RoP, the Court may at any stage of the proceedings order…
-
LD Düsseldorf, November 20, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_347/2024 and UPC_CFI_368/2024
“Obvious slips” within the meaning of R. 353 RoP, which allow the Court to rectify a decision or order, are all incorrect or incomplete statements of what the Court actually intended in the order or decision. In other words, the declaration of the Court’s intention in the decision or order must deviate from the intention…
-
Court of Appeal, November 21, 2024, Order, UPC_CoA_456/2024
Not every new argument constitutes an “amendment of a case” requiring a party to apply for leave under R. 263 RoP. : A case is amended when the nature or scope of the dispute changes. For example, in an infringement case, this occurs if the plaintiff invokes a different patent or objects to a different…
-
LD Munich, September 13, 2024, infringement action: decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_390/2023
No stay of the proceedings due to national nullity proceedings re. German part of patent-in-suit: Requirements of R. 295(a) RoP not fulfilled, appeal of the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) against the first instance decision of the German Federal Patent Court (FPC) is not expected to be given rapidly. A stay according to R.…
-
LD Düsseldorf, September 6, 2024, panel review order re. security for costs, UPC_CFI_373/2023, ORD_48181/2024
Confirmation of legal standard: it is a discretionary decision to order a security for legal costs and other expenses; imposing of a security serves to protect the position and (potential) rights of the Defendant : Factors to be considered (following CoA, UPC_CoA_328/2024; CD Munich, UPC_CFI_252/2023; LD Paris, UPC_495/2023): financial position of the other party that…
-
Court of Appeal, September 6, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CoA_489/2024, ORD_48358/2024
Applicant failed to demonstrate that a review of the impugned order is necessary to ensure a consistent application and interpretation of the RoP (point 8 of the Preamble of the RoP) or any other objective of the discretionary review procedure. Its contention that the impugned order is incorrect and does not provide a detailed interpretation…
-
CoA Luxembourg, June 4, 2024, order on withdrawal of appeal, UPC_CoA_183/2024
Applicable rule for the withdrawal of an appeal: R. 265 RoP, which has a broad scope: R. 265 RoP is primarily drafted with a view to comprehensive withdrawals of whole actions. It does neither distinguish between the first instance and the appeal proceedings nor between procedural appeal and appeals in substance. It does also not…
-
CoA Luxembourg, June 4, 2024, order on withdrawal of appeal, UPC_CoA_205/2024
Applicable rule for the withdrawal of an appeal: R. 265 RoP, which has a broad scope: R. 265 RoP is primarily drafted with a view to comprehensive withdrawals of whole actions. It does neither distinguish between the first instance and the appeal proceedings nor between procedural appeal and appeals in substance. It does also not…
-
LD Düsseldorf, February 23, 2024, secrecy protection order, UPC_CFI_463/2023
The requirement to be heard prior to issuing a secrecy protection order according to R. 262A RoP applies only to the final secrecy order and access restriction: In the interest of effective secrecy protection, access can be further restricted until a final order is issued, namely to the representative of the plaintiff In consideration of…
-
LD Düsseldorf, February 23, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_463/2023
Postponement of the start of a deadline until conclusion of secrecy protection proceedings according to R. 262A RoP is not compatible with the urgent nature of proceedings for provisional measures: As made clear in procedural order ORD_8568/2024, none of the deadlines in such proceedings for provisional measures can be extended in view of the timely…
-
LD Paris, February 12, 2024, procedural order re. alternative method of service, UPC_CFI_495/2023
Requirements for alternative methods of service: If digital tracking provided by the post office shows that delivery of the Statement of claim (SoC) initiated by the Court could not be carried out, alternative methods of service are possible, R. 275.1 RoP. In the present case, Claimant subsequently suggested three methods of service that appeared to…
-
LD Mannheim, 8 September 2023, procedural order re. alternative method of service, UPC_CFI_219/2023
Mandatory requirement of R. 275.2 RoP is a previous attempt to effect service in accordance with R. 270 to 274 RoP : R. 270 to 274 RoP do not provide for the possibility of service at a place of business within the Contracting Member States for defendants having their seat outside thereof; R. 271.5 RoP…
-
LD Munich, 27 September 2023, procedural order, UPC_CFI_5/2023
Requirements of service by an alternative method: Alternative service (R. 275.2 RoP) is also possible if an attempt of service pursuant R. 270 to 274 RoP has not yet been completed. “Attention” can be assumed under R. 275.2 RoP if either a legal relationship exists in which knowledge is attributed or if specific circumstances exist…