Author: Philipp Bovenkamp

  • CD Munich, December 28, 2023, Preliminary Order, UPC_CFI_75/2023

    Request under Rule 262.1(b) can be stayed if Court considers the outcome of appeal proceedings in a different case highly likely to be of relevance for the decision: Upon request under Rule 262.1(b) RoP of the Applicant to make available all written pleadings and evidence the Court decided to wait for the outcome of appeal…

  • CD Munich, 11 October 2023, procedural order Rule 9 RoP, UPC_CFI_80/2023

    Parties are under an obligation to use the CMS and the dedicated workflows in the CMS to file their submissions: Parties are under an obligation to use the CMS and the dedicated workflows in the CMS to file their submissions (see e.g. Rule 4.1 RoP). It is the sole responsibility of the parties that this…

  • CD Munich, 11 October 2023, procedural order Rule 9 RoP, UPC_CFI_75/2023

    Parties are under an obligation to use the CMS and the dedicated workflows in the CMS to file their submissions: Parties are under an obligation to use the CMS and the dedicated workflows in the CMS to file their submissions (see e.g. Rule 4.1 RoP). It is the sole responsibility of the parties that this…

  • LD Hamburg, 4 October 2023, final order, UPC_CFI_278/2023

    Extension of deadlines (R. 19.1, 23 RoP) in the case of a plurality of defendants and appointment of a representative making an electronic service possible: Here, a total of nine defendants are represented by the same representative. Appointment of the same representative helped to provide for a prompt and successful service of the statement for…

  • LD Munich, 29 September 2023, order, UPC_CFI_15/2023

    Filing of preliminary objection via an inappropriate workflow: Filing of preliminary objection via an inappropriate workflow is to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 42.2 UPCA). However, due to the early stage of the UPC proceedings and the resulting lack of experience with the UPC and its Rules of Procedure, the preliminary objection in the current…

  • LD Munich, 23 August 2023, final decision on request for extension of deadline, UPC_CFI_15/2023

    Extension of time limit for preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP): An intended harmonization of the time limit regime as such does not constitute a reason for extending the time limit that runs for the party to which was successfully served at an earlier point in time. Rather, an alignment can also be achieved by shortening…

  • LD Munich, 10 August 2023, final decision on request for extension of deadline, UPC_CFI_15/2023

    Extension of time limit for preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP): In case of more than one defendant, the Rules of Procedure do not require an alignment of the time limit for preliminary objection for the different parties. Usage of case management system at early stage of UPC : Working with the new procedural law and…